Democrat's don't want felons to vote per-se but States have the rights to take away voting right and to restore them. Some states re-store them when a felon has served their time some do not. Florida last election denied people who had the right to vote (given back to them by another State) in violation of the right of states to confer voting privilge. I suspect the Republicans have no problem with felons voting if they are going to vote Republican, do you?
Now then there is the issue of what is a felonly. Its different from State to State. Another issue to consider, do you accept the categorization of a crime as a felonly by another state or use your own.
"How were they going to win ANYTHING by forming a cordon around museums and hospitals? What are you envisioning?"
Maybe the cooperation and respect of the Iraqi people, Tell me again why Bush said he was going in there?
"You clearly know nothing of the size of Iraq. It's BIG. We were set up for trouble from the start, and everyone knew it. The level of competent planning that went into this was HUGE."
My point is that there was not enough competent planning as shown by the continued irrosion of support and security in the country. May (heres a thought) we should not have gone in there because the problem WAS too big for us to handle? It certainly was too big a problem for them to plan successfully for. Or maybe they didn't have a clue what they were getting into. Bush senior I think made reference to that very fact in his book.
"Without provocation? What on EARTH are you talking about? Iraq was in flagrant violation of their ceasefire (and don't forget -- a ceasefire is NOT the same thing as the end of a war!). You may not LIKE the invasion, but that's no excuse for lying about it."
I was lying about it and my point was that Bush made a unilateral decision about invasion, without UN support or sanction. There was a resolution that said that if they did not comply then action would be taken, but that action would be action by a UN sanctioned authority. Bush just took it on himself (and or his administrative team) to take that as Carte Banche to unilaterally invade Iraq. Not a lie not even a distortion. We did not have a right to Invade. There was no clear and present danger. Just someone we did not like or trust (a bad man certainly and bad governance) that had oil but no weapons of mass destruction nor connection to Al Quida. Where is the lie here, I think it was to the US public.
"What DOES matter to this argument is what's _known_. And that's Saddam's strategy before the war: he opened his stockpiles of explosives and weapons, and spread them out. He did the same with his army, and also released criminals from his prisons. We KNOW that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of tons of explosives are distributed throughout the country -- because he put them there. THIS is the danger in Iraq, and it's a known danger, and was known before we went in."
What do you think we would do if threatened. Lets see, the minute man missles on mobile launchers, nuclear submarines moving continuously so our weapons are not known and not in one place where a first strike would eliminate our ability to defend ourself. It sounds like a common sense strategy and one WE use all the time. This is not an indictment of Hussan and certainly not a danger or ominuous, just common sense military planning. What do you think he should have done. He was allowed to have conventional weapons? Lets be fair here and recognize that this is only a threat in the sense that it makes it harder for that sovereign nation to be invaded and taken over with ease and only a danger to the invaders not a danger to the world and certainly not a danger to the US Homeland. Any country has the right to protect themselves certainly (of course unless we think they are bad then they loose that right?)
"You could accuse Bush of giving him the time to do that. You'd be right; he did. But he did it attempting to build a large coalition with UN support."
Bush did not give them time to create a danger, only to prepare to protect themselves. He went through the motions only and only hoped the UN would provide cover for his actions. He never did want UN approval or a coalition for anything than political cover.
"The pace of death is increasing as the less-trained Iraqis finally take their country into their own hands, and as the US elections get closer. If Kerry wins, the pace will continue to increase, as enemy strategists attempt to test the resolve of an unknown; if Bush wins, they'll decrease, and the insurgents will attempt to settle in for a longer struggle (and possibly re-evaluate a struggle which is mainly killing their own countrymen)."
Conjecture here, if you won't give me conjecture you don't get it either. I would suggest that it only takes 1 to 2% of a population to have a revolution. Bush and his policies have ailientated more and more people in Iraq. They argue and attribute the civilian deaths to the presence of US troops and the occupation. The trend I think is in the wrong direction and without a change on our front (Kerry getting elected) that trend will only worsen. Its not getting better over there from all accounts.
"The price of death is being paid by Iraqis fighting for their own freedom, and by Iraqi civilians dying at the hands of terrorists from next door. More and more of them are not tolerating it, and are serving as informers against the terrorists."
Bush's strategy is not working. We are less secure there than just after we invaded a soveriegn nation without provocation. Not unlike Pearl Harbor, well they had more warning. Now tons of explosive are missing, people Iraqies and foreginers alike daily and the pace of death is steadily increasing. More and more Iraqies are getting tageted by their own people, fundementalist Muslum organizations are getting more and more recruits, more fundementalists are streaming in from other countries. We have lost several cities where we can not even venture in. The international community of nations is against our actions. We have been caught torturing prisoners, we have held people without trail inside and outside our borders for years violating their basic civil rights. We have had a defacto draft by mobilizing the reserves and national guard to fight abroad. There have been scandals about contracts to Halliburton and their blattant thefts of public funds (abandoning trucks with flat tires because they got a percentage for buying a new truck and nothing for changing a tire). Our troops guarding the oil ministry and oil fields but not the ammunition depots or the hostitals or the museums.
If these are part of Bush's strategy then I can't wait till tomorrow to cast my vote.
I would think that if you have been hearing the same BS all along that would raise a red flag that there might be something to those ideas, if for no other reason than they are shared by quite a few people.
Vote your conscience for your own reasons certainly.
If you have an opinion on the parent, let us know. Calling it BS without specifics or comentary is non-productive and certainly a waste of a post.
Interesting read, but shows the typical view of the neuvo-reich or wanna be's. The US capitalistic engine did not drive all the technology of the 20th century. We almost lost WWII because of the technology of Japan and Germany, we had to do some serious catching up mid-century, then look at Japan and Korea and now China at the end of the century in terms of technology and manufacturing. We had a large role but if you look at the large number of grad students we have produced that are really foregin students you have to say money isn't everything, and the view that we did it all is viewing history with the same blinders our President has on.
One of the problems we have is that the ones that are making all the big buck's aren't being productive at all, they just own things which is not a productive activity at all. Some do run things but they cut their own check before they pay their people and the ratio the salaries they pay to their salary can be like 1000 to 1. These are the people that favor repealing the minimum wage.
When you figure that these people have already factored the tax into their salaries when they set them, any tax cut is an undeserved raise. They had already stolen from profits to pay their tax. Then they forget that they have done that and claim that that is really what they should be paid and accept that raise quietly. They are factoring in those taxes just like information is factoring into the price of stocks by the same people.
I know lets let them have 100% salary pensions for life too like our retiring senators and congress men do. We can pay for it by cutting our insurance and health benefits for their workers, I know we will get the governement to pay them a little to put their own money asside in a heath savings account and I don't have to share my profits at all. I love it.
"how does "hating" someone have any logical correlation with whether their positions or courses of action are appropriate or inappropriate? "
is true but then in a representative democracy like ours if you hate the person in office for what ever reason you vote them out, period. But then Bush is all about "Leadership" which is just a catch phrase for "I'm going to do what I want not what you want".
When you say
"Keep 'em coming. You know what? The US never went to Iraq for WMD (though we were justified in doing so for that reason alone, and probably expected to find quite a bit). Yes, in a way, it went for "oil". But to view it in those terms is ridiculously stupid. What does that "oil" do? Hint: the answer is not powering American suburban moms' Suburbans."
That in and of itself is an indictment of Bush's war effort false justifications, that is lying to the public if that was not the real reason for going to war with Iraq or is that just leadership again.
It does not matter if Bush and his people have a plan to democratize the Middle East. You don't trump up a reason and invade a country, YOU DON'T DO THAT! International law and international agreements and international precedence has been violated for some Texan's view of what they wanted and by damn they were going to get it. Again this is "Leadership" of the worst kind. The kind that passes laws to dimish our rights of privacy while increasing out risk by stompping into the Middle East, allowing the sale of assault rifles at home, the move towards distruction of our public schools, the degredation of our envirionment, the isolation of us internationally, but what else could you expect from "Leadership" from somone who lost the election on popular vote. He needed a war (refer to 1984, Wag the Dog...) Let's include that last reason along with the others when we consider why we are in Iraq and why our people are dying every day.
"java is not a bad language. i think many would agree that is it at least decent (i think it's pretty good, actually). but java is the language of the B coders. it is made to be easy and idiot proof, like visual basic. you cannot do "neat hacks" in java, because if you could, the B coders would screw it up and produce worse code. java is a great language for the B coders. but the choice of java for a project is often a leaning toward strategy B. it's the "we can get any code monkey off the street to do this". it's the grunt work software that real hackers don't want to do, and what B coders are hired for."
But then if you think about it historically, say Databases for instance which when they were first introduced were expensive, slow, combersome to use and support, but yet there use took over the industry in a short time. Why? Not because there were difficult to use, or expensive or slow but because they solved a fundemental problem, that of the seperation of the logical view of data from the physical view of data. That one fact alone saved everyone man centuries of work. The IT industry was at a standstill with all the time maintaining systems and no time or manpower left for building new systems. Some of the features of Java like Garbage collection and array bounds checking solve another fundemental problem software developers have (not to mention the device independence and the comprehensive language libraries).
I guess it gets down to where you want to spend your time. Writing applications that work, or collecting the garbage yet again. If your contention is that people who like to collect their own garbage over and over are "A" programmers then I think we are really talking about "D" programmers for Dinasaur's.
Some people write poems some novels some advertisements some love letters some editorials. Who are you to say which medium of expression is more valuable?
The contention that Java is more secure is true. The problem you mention is an architecture issue that spans over the language (more a design pattern thing) and C or C++ or.net programs written for the same application would have the same issue. But the C and C++ would in addtion to your stated problem have buffer overflow and and whatnot problems. There is not automatically secure envrionment but the Java language has stopped up many of the hole that exist in other languages including those things that kill the app like array out of bounds and memory leak problems.
Java like Smalltalk soft fails typically with user catchable errors whereas C and C++ hard fail most of the time with errors that are not catchable without much programming in many places. Thats a good trade off for my money
I would think you are using an old version of Java. The newer versions 1.4 and above have much improved runtime performance. It is possible that the style you use creates and destroys a lot of objects and this is always a slow process. Just like in C++ is you are doing a lot of object creation and distruction. The fact that you are sucking up a lot of memory might suggest that as well. I have a lot of applictions that smoke.
You can use strategies like object caching and re-use of objects and singletons where appropriate to improve performance. Like any language once you undestand the costs of various operations you can program better. I remember when floating point mulitplies and divides were so expensive and done mostly in software and we had to program around that and compilers made optimizations for that face replacing floating point operations with interger operations behind the scenes. It is a continuous battle to find the proper path in any forrest.
Well Java as I understand moves much of the optimization process down into the JVM whereas a compiled language like C++ does that optimization during compile time. Comparing the time I have spent waiting for C++ during the code, compile, run, code, compile run, I find I have wasted much more of my time. With the Caching of classes and dynamic inlining of code the JVM tunes up as you you go along.
You are correct that this model has a start up delay which can be seen as a problem if you do a lot of startups, but like many applicatons say a web server that starts a JVM and keeps it running while the server is up it is a one time charge. I find that given the saftey of the language especially around automatic garbage collection compared with C++ my envirionment is rock stable and the online Web apps we have only come down with the hardware needs maintenance.
The folks compainign about MS Java have a good complaint as that was an old buggy version of Java that has not been in general use for years by people using Java from the Sun source. The new versions of Java 1.4... current and 1.5 (Tiger) coming in a few months are light years ahead of that old MS version and should be looked at seriously.
I write my code on NT and W2k platforms (java 1.4.2) and field the same code on WNT W2k Sun Solaris with out modification and no changes for envirionments. With C++ or C# and the java clone this is impossible at this time. I have in the past had to field C++ code on different platforms and that was not a very nice time.
How do you want to spend your time. Collecting your own Garbage, writting very very carefully so you can use your code in different environments, or do you want to just get the job done right and once and get on with it?
No Lie, in black and white, probably made in the 30's, dubbed from the Spanish, with mummies, and other creatures and a Fu Manchu character and several other movies all rolled into one. I have it on VHS.
But lets see, to get my own domain address, at least $75, to have someone host it, more bucks. To set up the forwarding.. and maintain it, several steps you have to remember to do for the rest of your life.
If you have the money and the time, this is certainly a more time and more money trade off to a free stable service.
My hotmail account is not just known to the people in my address book. A number of vendors and business contacts that I want to hear from have been given that address.
The empirical evidence I presented about the stability of that address over my lifetime so far versus the other ISP emails I have had says it is way more stable. I think that stability of ability to contact is a useful thing if you want to be found. Otherwise it is just a royal pain.
Well, Yahoo and Hotmail have been the Internet equivalent to what has been tried in two different ways with phone service. The "number for life" wasn' that the 700 numbers which no one bought into and the new cell phone change where you can keep and pass your number from cellphone provider to the next.
In my own case my ISP has changed at least 3 times when I was in dialup and at least 3 time my cable service has changed hands with cooresponding changes in mail service and address. Cablevision to ATT to Comcast.
If you want an address that people know about, that does not change, that is available anywhere, then those free services provide that. That one service, of continuity, has its own value. So don't pity the smart people. Pity all your friends that you did not message that your email address changed so they can never find you again.
I Think this is a legal setup by the company to set people up for criminal prosecution. As I understand the DMCA has a provision that makes it criminal to circumvent security protections. We have seen this used to intimidate Universal Garage door openers. If you don't have a security mechanism in place you have fewer ways to go after the copiers.
The profits they make off these movies are in the millions, usually more than covering the cost of making the film. It is just pure profit rolling in and it is not because of additional work done. It is not like you are stealing money from hard working folks, they got their money from the film as salary. Only a few get the benefit from extra profits from movie sales, the producers, director, writers and some actors that get a percentage. The first Star Wars films gave most of the actors a set rate for the first 3 films. Hans Solo I believe didn't go for that deal and got lots more for subsiquent films.
The theaters loose some though but probably not enough to warrant the cost of night vision goggles.
So this move is in protection of the huge potential profits of the Movie producers and company. They are surely a group who's profits I want to go out of my way to protect. Now if they did like Marshall's and as time went on, lowered the price to see a movie (that had already covered its costs and a resonable profit), maybe. But they keep raising the prices and keep making millions and millions (on the winners).
But then those winners probably cover the cost of them producing the dog's. Which means that we are subsidizing their bad choices, essentially lowering their risk and probably allowing more dog's to be made, cause we are picking up the tab for them.
I am sure they will raise the prices to go to a movie to pay for the night vision goggle too.
Sadly there has been recent historical evidence of the "Intellegence" services keeping files on not only Terrorists, and dissidents, but members of congress and political opponents. If we look at the secrecy policies of this current US adminstration (which has classified more documents than any previous administration) and their quick willingness to circumvent our own laws as well as international laws for their own view of "security", you would see that we do have something to be afraid of.
If you look at the intellegence gathering culture that started in Guantanamo and spread to Afganistan and ended up in Iraq, where thank God they were caught and exposed. Not only for the sake of those people being tortured by our military but for us and for the reputation and good name of the US around the world (it will be 100 years before we can hold our heads up internationally again). The people inside the secrecy barrier don't care if you are innocent or guilty, they will "soften" you up to see. Maybe you have something to tell maybe you don't. Maybe your a terrorist or maybe just an innocent caught in a raid. Lets strip you naked and set the dogs on you and worse and point and laugh and take pictures.
This is the culture that is controlling the intellegence gathering. You trust these people to do it right? Just hope to God that you don't have a name spelled close to someone on there list. Or someone on their list punches a phone number in wrong and rings your phone, or that you speak out against the practices of this government. You will get on their list to stay.
Well we do have an election of choice coming up, Thank God. (not to be confused with any sort of connection or approval of the growing connection between Church (one specific religious philosophy that will go unnamed (He gets pissed if you use his name (he goes by so many different names))) and State).
I beg your pardon. I think it reasonable that private conversations be private and that is a reasonable expectation in this country. We have checks and balances on our government and law enforcement and should have more on our employers. The are getting far too many rights to monitor us. Who is watching them? There is a principle that you can not be forced to incriminate yourself. You don't even need to testify on your own behalf in a trial. You are not required to tell the truth except under oath, just ask any car or insurance salesman or the current administration.
I for one do not want to live in a fish bowl like in Catch 22, but we seem to be heading in that direction, and will arrive unless we all stand up and say no. I applaud the court for making the proper judgement that upholds the law not only to the letter but in the spirit of the law.
Maybe the best choice is to require families to support there elders as has been the tradition in many cultures. But wait, that only works if you have an expanding population the old pyramid scheme again.
Robbery does have a lot to do with it. The market prices are set by people's expectation. We have seen the various corporate scandals, Enron, Savings and Loan etc, have deep and lasting effects on the markets. The.com bust very much wiped out lots of portfolios worth and it has taken how many years for those people and their portfolios to recover? Have they even come close?
So not only robbery but speculation can cause real substantial negative shifts in them market with real loss to real people when they need the income.
This long term nonsense works for large deversified portfolios but does not work if you choose your market points differently.
Such a long explaination about what to do. You see it is not a simple thing. If there was anyone who could predict market cycles or market events they are not talking.
As I recall there the bond market fluctuates to just like the stock market. Who's to know what to do. Give the lady that works on the factory floor, has worked for 20 years and has a 401K. Cant afford a financial advisor, sees the portfolio choices presented to her by the fund manager. How is she going to make a decision on what to do? Her son might be a car mechanic all the way on the coast and she can't ask him. What to do. She may be working 2 jobs to get enough money to send her daughter to college so she doesn't have time to 'study' the markets.
Your probably right. She deserves what she gets if she is off in her market timing choices, she should loose the only home she has ever had and the dream that her daughter might do something better with a college education.
I submit your analysis is urban and callous and you need to think carefully about the implications of that stance on real people in real situations.
The funding of pensions from other works has been a choice and a bad choice. The proper choice is and has always been to take in the money, use it to make money (the SS endowment) with the number such that it funds itself. That is how is is done in the insurance industry.
Slashdot Mirror
Democrat's don't want felons to vote per-se but States have the rights to take away voting right and to restore them. Some states re-store them when a felon has served their time some do not. Florida last election denied people who had the right to vote (given back to them by another State) in violation of the right of states to confer voting privilge. I suspect the Republicans have no problem with felons voting if they are going to vote Republican, do you?
Now then there is the issue of what is a felonly. Its different from State to State. Another issue to consider, do you accept the categorization of a crime as a felonly by another state or use your own.
Interesting conundrum that.
Billy Billy,
"How were they going to win ANYTHING by forming a cordon around museums and hospitals? What are you envisioning?"
Maybe the cooperation and respect of the Iraqi people, Tell me again why Bush said he was going in there?
"You clearly know nothing of the size of Iraq. It's BIG. We were set up for trouble from the start, and everyone knew it. The level of competent planning that went into this was HUGE."
My point is that there was not enough competent planning as shown by the continued irrosion of support and security in the country. May (heres a thought) we should not have gone in there because the problem WAS too big for us to handle? It certainly was too big a problem for them to plan successfully for. Or maybe they didn't have a clue what they were getting into. Bush senior I think made reference to that very fact in his book.
--John
Bush's strategy is not working.
Let's see.
"Without provocation? What on EARTH are you talking about? Iraq was in flagrant violation of their ceasefire (and don't forget -- a ceasefire is NOT the same thing as the end of a war!). You may not LIKE the invasion, but that's no excuse for lying about it."
I was lying about it and my point was that Bush made a unilateral decision about invasion, without UN support or sanction. There was a resolution that said that if they did not comply then action would be taken, but that action would be action by a UN sanctioned authority. Bush just took it on himself (and or his administrative team) to take that as Carte Banche to unilaterally invade Iraq. Not a lie not even a distortion. We did not have a right to Invade. There was no clear and present danger. Just someone we did not like or trust (a bad man certainly and bad governance) that had oil but no weapons of mass destruction nor connection to Al Quida. Where is the lie here, I think it was to the US public.
"What DOES matter to this argument is what's _known_. And that's Saddam's strategy before the war: he opened his stockpiles of explosives and weapons, and spread them out. He did the same with his army, and also released criminals from his prisons. We KNOW that hundreds, perhaps thousands, of tons of explosives are distributed throughout the country -- because he put them there. THIS is the danger in Iraq, and it's a known danger, and was known before we went in."
What do you think we would do if threatened. Lets see, the minute man missles on mobile launchers, nuclear submarines moving continuously so our weapons are not known and not in one place where a first strike would eliminate our ability to defend ourself. It sounds like a common sense strategy and one WE use all the time. This is not an indictment of Hussan and certainly not a danger or ominuous, just common sense military planning. What do you think he should have done. He was allowed to have conventional weapons? Lets be fair here and recognize that this is only a threat in the sense that it makes it harder for that sovereign nation to be invaded and taken over with ease and only a danger to the invaders not a danger to the world and certainly not a danger to the US Homeland. Any country has the right to protect themselves certainly (of course unless we think they are bad then they loose that right?)
"You could accuse Bush of giving him the time to do that. You'd be right; he did. But he did it attempting to build a large coalition with UN support."
Bush did not give them time to create a danger, only to prepare to protect themselves. He went through the motions only and only hoped the UN would provide cover for his actions. He never did want UN approval or a coalition for anything than political cover.
"The pace of death is increasing as the less-trained Iraqis finally take their country into their own hands, and as the US elections get closer. If Kerry wins, the pace will continue to increase, as enemy strategists attempt to test the resolve of an unknown; if Bush wins, they'll decrease, and the insurgents will attempt to settle in for a longer struggle (and possibly re-evaluate a struggle which is mainly killing their own countrymen)."
Conjecture here, if you won't give me conjecture you don't get it either. I would suggest that it only takes 1 to 2% of a population to have a revolution. Bush and his policies have ailientated more and more people in Iraq. They argue and attribute the civilian deaths to the presence of US troops and the occupation. The trend I think is in the wrong direction and without a change on our front (Kerry getting elected) that trend will only worsen. Its not getting better over there from all accounts.
"The price of death is being paid by Iraqis fighting for their own freedom, and by Iraqi civilians dying at the hands of terrorists from next door. More and more of them are not tolerating it, and are serving as informers against the terrorists."
Con
Bush's strategy is not working. We are less secure there than just after we invaded a soveriegn nation without provocation. Not unlike Pearl Harbor, well they had more warning. Now tons of explosive are missing, people Iraqies and foreginers alike daily and the pace of death is steadily increasing. More and more Iraqies are getting tageted by their own people, fundementalist Muslum organizations are getting more and more recruits, more fundementalists are streaming in from other countries. We have lost several cities where we can not even venture in. The international community of nations is against our actions. We have been caught torturing prisoners, we have held people without trail inside and outside our borders for years violating their basic civil rights. We have had a defacto draft by mobilizing the reserves and national guard to fight abroad. There have been scandals about contracts to Halliburton and their blattant thefts of public funds (abandoning trucks with flat tires because they got a percentage for buying a new truck and nothing for changing a tire). Our troops guarding the oil ministry and oil fields but not the ammunition depots or the hostitals or the museums.
If these are part of Bush's strategy then I can't wait till tomorrow to cast my vote.
Please tell m
I would think that if you have been hearing the same BS all along that would raise a red flag that there might be something to those ideas, if for no other reason than they are shared by quite a few people.
Vote your conscience for your own reasons certainly.
If you have an opinion on the parent, let us know. Calling it BS without specifics or comentary is non-productive and certainly a waste of a post.
Interesting read, but shows the typical view of the neuvo-reich or wanna be's. The US capitalistic engine did not drive all the technology of the 20th century.
We almost lost WWII because of the technology of Japan and Germany, we had to do some serious catching up mid-century, then look at Japan and Korea and now China at the end of the century in terms of technology and manufacturing. We had a large role but if you look at the large number of grad students we have produced that are really foregin students you have to say money isn't everything, and the view that we did it all is viewing history with the same blinders our President has on.
One of the problems we have is that the ones that are making all the big buck's aren't being productive at all, they just own things which is not a productive activity at all. Some do run things but they cut their own check before they pay their people and the ratio the salaries they pay to their salary can be like 1000 to 1. These are the people that favor repealing the minimum wage.
When you figure that these people have already factored the tax into their salaries when they set them, any tax cut is an undeserved raise. They had already stolen from profits to pay their tax. Then they forget that they have done that and claim that that is really what they should be paid and accept that raise quietly. They are factoring in those taxes just like information is factoring into the price of stocks by the same people.
I know lets let them have 100% salary pensions for life too like our retiring senators and congress men do. We can pay for it by cutting our insurance and health benefits for their workers, I know we will get the governement to pay them a little to put their own money asside in a heath savings account and I don't have to share my profits at all. I love it.
Incredible,
When you say
"how does "hating" someone have any logical correlation with whether their positions or courses of action are appropriate or inappropriate? "
is true but then in a representative democracy like ours if you hate the person in office for what ever reason you vote them out, period. But then Bush is all about "Leadership" which is just a catch phrase for "I'm going to do what I want not what you want".
When you say
"Keep 'em coming. You know what? The US never went to Iraq for WMD (though we were justified in doing so for that reason alone, and probably expected to find quite a bit). Yes, in a way, it went for "oil". But to view it in those terms is ridiculously stupid. What does that "oil" do? Hint: the answer is not powering American suburban moms' Suburbans."
That in and of itself is an indictment of Bush's war effort false justifications, that is lying to the public if that was not the real reason for going to war with Iraq or is that just leadership again.
It does not matter if Bush and his people have a plan to democratize the Middle East. You don't trump up a reason and invade a country, YOU DON'T DO THAT! International law and international agreements and international precedence has been violated for some Texan's view of what they wanted and by damn they were going to get it. Again this is "Leadership" of the worst kind. The kind that passes laws to dimish our rights of privacy while increasing out risk by stompping into the Middle East, allowing the sale of assault rifles at home, the move towards distruction of our public schools, the degredation of our envirionment, the isolation of us internationally, but what else could you expect from "Leadership" from somone who lost the election on popular vote. He needed a war (refer to 1984, Wag the Dog...) Let's include that last reason along with the others when we consider why we are in Iraq and why our people are dying every day.
Texas Leadership -> Teetership
Lets vote for representative democracy again.
"java is not a bad language. i think many would agree that is it at least decent (i think it's pretty good, actually). but java is the language of the B coders. it is made to be easy and idiot proof, like visual basic. you cannot do "neat hacks" in java, because if you could, the B coders would screw it up and produce worse code. java is a great language for the B coders. but the choice of java for a project is often a leaning toward strategy B. it's the "we can get any code monkey off the street to do this". it's the grunt work software that real hackers don't want to do, and what B coders are hired for."
But then if you think about it historically, say Databases for instance which when they were first introduced were expensive, slow, combersome to use and support, but yet there use took over the industry in a short time. Why? Not because there were difficult to use, or expensive or slow but because they solved a fundemental problem, that of the seperation of the logical view of data from the physical view of data. That one fact alone saved everyone man centuries of work. The IT industry was at a standstill with all the time maintaining systems and no time or manpower left for building new systems. Some of the features of Java like Garbage collection and array bounds checking solve another fundemental problem software developers have (not to mention the device independence and the comprehensive language libraries).
I guess it gets down to where you want to spend your time. Writing applications that work, or collecting the garbage yet again. If your contention is that people who like to collect their own garbage over and over are "A" programmers then I think we are really talking about "D" programmers for Dinasaur's.
Some people write poems some novels some advertisements some love letters some editorials. Who are you to say which medium of expression is more valuable?
The contention that Java is more secure is true. The problem you mention is an architecture issue that spans over the language (more a design pattern thing) and C or C++ or .net programs written for the same application would have the same issue. But the C and C++ would in addtion to your stated problem have buffer overflow and and whatnot problems. There is not automatically secure envrionment but the Java language has stopped up many of the hole that exist in other languages including those things that kill the app like array out of bounds and memory leak problems.
Java like Smalltalk soft fails typically with user catchable errors whereas C and C++ hard fail most of the time with errors that are not catchable without much programming in many places. Thats a good trade off for my money
I would think you are using an old version of Java. The newer versions 1.4 and above have much improved runtime performance. It is possible that the style you use creates and destroys a lot of objects and this is always a slow process. Just like in C++ is you are doing a lot of object creation and distruction. The fact that you are sucking up a lot of memory might suggest that as well. I have a lot of applictions that smoke.
You can use strategies like object caching and re-use of objects and singletons where appropriate to improve performance. Like any language once you undestand the costs of various operations you can program better. I remember when floating point mulitplies and divides were so expensive and done mostly in software and we had to program around that and compilers made optimizations for that face replacing floating point operations with interger operations behind the scenes. It is a continuous battle to find the proper path in any forrest.
Well Java as I understand moves much of the optimization process down into the JVM whereas a compiled language like C++ does that optimization during compile time. Comparing the time I have spent waiting for C++ during the code, compile, run, code, compile run, I find I have wasted much more of my time. With the Caching of classes and dynamic inlining of code the JVM tunes up as you you go along.
... current and 1.5 (Tiger) coming in a few months are light years ahead of that old MS version and should be looked at seriously.
You are correct that this model has a start up delay which can be seen as a problem if you do a lot of startups, but like many applicatons say a web server that starts a JVM and keeps it running while the server is up it is a one time charge. I find that given the saftey of the language especially around automatic garbage collection compared with C++ my envirionment is rock stable and the online Web apps we have only come down with the hardware needs maintenance.
The folks compainign about MS Java have a good complaint as that was an old buggy version of Java that has not been in general use for years by people using Java from the Sun source. The new versions of Java 1.4
I write my code on NT and W2k platforms (java 1.4.2) and field the same code on WNT W2k Sun Solaris with out modification and no changes for envirionments. With C++ or C# and the java clone this is impossible at this time. I have in the past had to field C++ code on different platforms and that was not a very nice time.
How do you want to spend your time. Collecting your own Garbage, writting very very carefully so you can use your code in different environments, or do you want to just get the job done right and once and get on with it?
No Lie, in black and white, probably made in the 30's, dubbed from the Spanish, with mummies, and other creatures and a Fu Manchu character and several other movies all rolled into one. I have it on VHS.
Awsome
Good job.. There is still that pesky domain name registration fee but, looks like a good way to go.
That certainly is one approach.
But lets see, to get my own domain address, at least $75, to have someone host it, more bucks. To set up the forwarding.. and maintain it, several steps you have to remember to do for the rest of your life.
If you have the money and the time, this is certainly a more time and more money trade off to a free stable service.
Yes but,
My hotmail account is not just known to the people in my address book. A number of vendors and business contacts that I want to hear from have been given that address.
The empirical evidence I presented about the stability of that address over my lifetime so far versus the other ISP emails I have had says it is way more stable. I think that stability of ability to contact is a useful thing if you want to be found. Otherwise it is just a royal pain.
Well, Yahoo and Hotmail have been the Internet equivalent to what has been tried in two different ways with phone service. The "number for life" wasn' that the 700 numbers which no one bought into and the new cell phone change where you can keep and pass your number from cellphone provider to the next.
In my own case my ISP has changed at least 3 times when I was in dialup and at least 3 time my cable service has changed hands with cooresponding changes in mail service and address. Cablevision to ATT to Comcast.
If you want an address that people know about, that does not change, that is available anywhere, then those free services provide that. That one service, of continuity, has its own value. So don't pity the smart people. Pity all your friends that you did not message that your email address changed so they can never find you again.
I would suspect your Hotmail spam filter option choices make a difference on what you do or do not receive.
I Think this is a legal setup by the company to set people up for criminal prosecution. As I understand the DMCA has a provision that makes it criminal to circumvent security protections. We have seen this used to intimidate Universal Garage door openers. If you don't have a security mechanism in place you have fewer ways to go after the copiers.
/ 13 11232&mode=thread&tid=99
/ 21 25232&mode=thread&tid=123&tid=99
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/01/16
which was later thrown out.
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/11/16
But in the process the company lost a big contract with a Home Improvement chain.
You only have to have the security in place to set the trap.
The profits they make off these movies are in the millions, usually more than covering the cost of making the film. It is just pure profit rolling in and it is not because of additional work done. It is not like you are stealing money from hard working folks, they got their money from the film as salary. Only a few get the benefit from extra profits from movie sales, the producers, director, writers and some actors that get a percentage. The first Star Wars films gave most of the actors a set rate for the first 3 films. Hans Solo I believe didn't go for that deal and got lots more for subsiquent films.
The theaters loose some though but probably not enough to warrant the cost of night vision goggles.
So this move is in protection of the huge potential profits of the Movie producers and company. They are surely a group who's profits I want to go out of my way to protect. Now if they did like Marshall's and as time went on, lowered the price to see a movie (that had already covered its costs and a resonable profit), maybe. But they keep raising the prices and keep making millions and millions (on the winners).
But then those winners probably cover the cost of them producing the dog's. Which means that we are subsidizing their bad choices, essentially lowering their risk and probably allowing more dog's to be made, cause we are picking up the tab for them.
I am sure they will raise the prices to go to a movie to pay for the night vision goggle too.
One of my all time favorites.. It is in my video collection.
Sadly there has been recent historical evidence of the "Intellegence" services keeping files on not only Terrorists, and dissidents, but members of congress and political opponents. If we look at the secrecy policies of this current US adminstration (which has classified more documents than any previous administration) and their quick willingness to circumvent our own laws as well as international laws for their own view of "security", you would see that we do have something to be afraid of.
If you look at the intellegence gathering culture that started in Guantanamo and spread to Afganistan and ended up in Iraq, where thank God they were caught and exposed. Not only for the sake of those people being tortured by our military but for us and for the reputation and good name of the US around the world (it will be 100 years before we can hold our heads up internationally again). The people inside the secrecy barrier don't care if you are innocent or guilty, they will "soften" you up to see. Maybe you have something to tell maybe you don't. Maybe your a terrorist or maybe just an innocent caught in a raid. Lets strip you naked and set the dogs on you and worse and point and laugh and take pictures.
This is the culture that is controlling the intellegence gathering. You trust these people to do it right? Just hope to God that you don't have a name spelled close to someone on there list. Or someone on their list punches a phone number in wrong and rings your phone, or that you speak out against the practices of this government. You will get on their list to stay.
Well we do have an election of choice coming up, Thank God. (not to be confused with any sort of connection or approval of the growing connection between Church (one specific religious philosophy that will go unnamed (He gets pissed if you use his name (he goes by so many different names))) and State).
I beg your pardon. I think it reasonable that private conversations be private and that is a reasonable expectation in this country. We have checks and balances on our government and law enforcement and should have more on our employers. The are getting far too many rights to monitor us. Who is watching them? There is a principle that you can not be forced to incriminate yourself. You don't even need to testify on your own behalf in a trial. You are not required to tell the truth except under oath, just ask any car or insurance salesman or the current administration.
I for one do not want to live in a fish bowl like in Catch 22, but we seem to be heading in that direction, and will arrive unless we all stand up and say no. I applaud the court for making the proper judgement that upholds the law not only to the letter but in the spirit of the law.
Maybe the best choice is to require families to support there elders as has been the tradition in many cultures. But wait, that only works if you have an expanding population the old pyramid scheme again.
.com bust very much wiped out lots of portfolios worth and it has taken how many years for those people and their portfolios to recover? Have they even come close?
Robbery does have a lot to do with it. The market prices are set by people's expectation. We have seen the various corporate scandals, Enron, Savings and Loan etc, have deep and lasting effects on the markets. The
So not only robbery but speculation can cause real substantial negative shifts in them market with real loss to real people when they need the income.
This long term nonsense works for large deversified portfolios but does not work if you choose your market points differently.
Such a long explaination about what to do. You see it is not a simple thing. If there was anyone who could predict market cycles or market events they are not talking.
As I recall there the bond market fluctuates to just like the stock market. Who's to know what to do. Give the lady that works on the factory floor, has worked for 20 years and has a 401K. Cant afford a financial advisor, sees the portfolio choices presented to her by the fund manager. How is she going to make a decision on what to do? Her son might be a car mechanic all the way on the coast and she can't ask him. What to do. She may be working 2 jobs to get enough money to send her daughter to college so she doesn't have time to 'study' the markets.
Your probably right. She deserves what she gets if she is off in her market timing choices, she should loose the only home she has ever had and the dream that her daughter might do something better with a college education.
I submit your analysis is urban and callous and you need to think carefully about the implications of that stance on real people in real situations.
The funding of pensions from other works has been a choice and a bad choice. The proper choice is and has always been to take in the money, use it to make money (the SS endowment) with the number such that it funds itself. That is how is is done in the insurance industry.