I found those in about 5 seconds with google. Thats 100% first page results. WHAT THE FUCK DUDE? Completely fucking blind much? We've got in there convictions, tens of thousands of out-of-state residents voting, and so on? What the fuck?
Isnt the fact that his citation complete crap enough evidence to lead you to doubt if what he is saying is true? In other words... whats wrong with you? We know whats wrong with him... but you?
No, but they add R's to ends of words.. which might as well be the beginning of the next.. a classic example is the Boston fisherman that calls the fish he catches "tuner" instead of "tuna".. (and they say "tunah" instead of "tuner" when talking about the radio dial...)
Advocates of affirmative actions often claim that racial quotas dont exist.
There is a problem with that claim.... EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT YOU, AK MARC (707885), ARE LYING WHEN YOU MAKE THAT CLAIM.
Now lets get on with your OTHER bullshit...
But they were never required, and us non-racists never needed to consider quotas.
Not according to the FUCKING SUPREME COURT. If you are an employer that has ANY minimum qualification standards of any kind, such as requiring a high school diploma, then you damn well better have racial quotas. The court ruled in 1971 that even something simple like requiring a high school diploma is racial discrimination if through the application of that minimum requirement that minorities are adversely effected, even if those adverse effects are not intentional. This was a FINDING OF FACT by the court, asshole.
Now stop being a lying ignorant dumbfuck thats so devoted that he cant be bothered to check facts.
Most Linux distributions do not come with the ability to play DVD's... which makes me wonder what the hell you are talking about. Nobody is going to run to Linux just because Windows doesnt come with a DVD player.
The counter-argumenters will respond to you about indirect benefits. Certainly in the case of schooling they have a valid point. You do benefit from the fact that almost everyone in the country has a basic education, and although its hard to put a value on this benefit it is certainly a significant one when compared to living in any country where almost no one has a basic education.
That isnt to say that everyone should pay the same amount to support the public school system, but it is to say that everyone should be paying at least something because everyone has benefited and does continue to benefit from it. The people that directly use the public school system should be paying more than those that do not, for sure. As usual, the truth turns out to be somewhere in the middle of the extremes.
So, how do you propose that the workers that Microsoft depends on be educated?
..educate them like the rest of the country does? Its called property taxes...
The schools in your city or town are run and primarily funded by local property taxes. In general, about 50% of your local property taxes (if you live in America) goes towards the local schools. The correlation between property tax rates and schools is so strong that property taxes are often derived by school district instead of by town or county.
So yeah... I propose that they be educated in schools, and that those schools be funded by people and businesses local to the school.
What does this have to do with Microsoft or the State of Washington? Oh yeah.. you seem to think that if Microsoft didnt pay taxes to the State of Washington, that the town of Redmond isnt doing well with its school district funding. If you look at the home values (median of $452K in 2009) and income levels (median of 88K in 2009) of those that live in the town of Redmond vs State or National averages, then you will see that the town of Redmond is doing very well for itself, and for certain those schools are very well funded even if the tax rates are significantly lower than average.
Are you suggesting that Microsoft in Redmond Washington should be paying something for the schools in Moosup Connecticut?
Raising taxes on Microsoft doesnt end with Balmer deciding between Somalia and America.. Raising taxes on Microsoft ends with Microsoft deciding between Balmer and someone else. Microsoft the corporation doesnt suffer "living conditions".. only "economic conditions."
The discussion is about State taxes on corporations, but some really fool-hearty people (you ignorants) dont seem to know that there is a real difference between corporations and the executives currently "in charge" like Balmer.
As someone has already asked, how much in taxes would Microsoft (not Balmer) bare before moving out of Washington? The event "Microsoft moves to Somalia" does not equal "Balmer moves to Somalia." nor does the event "Balmer moves to Somalia" equal the event "Microsoft moves to Somalia"
Washington could enact severe personal income taxes without Microsoft giving any shits at all about it. Moving the company because of it wouldnt even be a matter of board room discussion, although maybe the topic of a few board room jokes.
This isnt a race to the bottom. If you dont think that its a good thing that downward pressure exists on taxes because of the competition between tax regions, then lets discuss that.. but I don't think that you want to discuss what you are trying really hard not to even admit to yourself.
Isn't that the right time to ditch a product? If you don't think it's going to work out, it seems much better to ditch it before you launch it.
A team that works for 6 months or even several years will not at the end say "We give up. You blew all that money. Very sorry about that." Someone much higher up than the team, clear of all blame, has made the decision to cancel the project. Good or bad, Google has THAT guy,
You have totally mischaracterised the debate. Most scientists aren't shouting about the end of the world -- but/some/ scientists are shouting about doing/something/ to mitigate against future risk.
If we arent actually talking about the scientific version of the apocalypse, then why are we discussing such major sacrifices?
I never said the government didn't bear some responsibility for the housing downturn.
Nobody said that you didn't. Is this an attempt to hide the weakness of your actual argument by sprinkling irrelevant facts that bare no relevance to the discussion at hand? Nobody gives a shit if you said it or not, and nobody claimed that you did or did not because its fucking meaningless.
The point, which seems to have gone completely over your head, is that housing market is cyclical, and downturns happen fairly regularly. What made this one different is that policies - put in place by Republicans - turned the economy into a tinderbox and all that was needed to cause a meltdown was one spark.
The bullshit point you made does not trump simple economics. Supply and demand. The government greatly interfered with the supply of housing credit, causing a bubble many times bigger than is natural. Until you admit to and address this simple fact, you are just blowing partisan political smoke (the fact that you dont like Republicans has nothing to do with the housing bubble, idiot.)
So you feel the need to blame the Republicans for the housing bubble, but you don't even have a fucking clue what caused the bubble to be so big. Obvious partisan rationalizing bullshit is obvious. You are throwing blame without even knowing what, exactly, was the problem. What a fucking tool you are.
with your KDE asnd GNOME applications managed by different task managers.
You are arguing as if this were a good thing. What you seem to be saying is that "yeah Linux currently offers some of the same GUI duality that Windows 8 will, but its worse in Linux because of these other implementation reasons."
I would argue that if Linux is currently doing it poorly, than doing it better is a good idea that the authors of KDE and Gnome should strive for. That the fact that Windows 8 will offer better functionality than what is current in the Linux world is not a mark against Windows 8, but instead a mark against KDE and Gnome (as well as Unity and whatnot.)
This argument that having multiple windowing managers is somehow a bad thing for the users is fairly laughable. Choice is power. Period. When did the Linux crowd forget this?
In fact I hear alot about 'creating jobs', for example recent talks in my state for a casino, even though its a negative sum game.
I was agreeing with you until this..
While casinos do not create wealth, they do concentrate it. When in a situation where neighboring States have already opened casinos or have plans to do so, it would be extremely foolish if your State were to refuse to do the same. The State of Connecticut gets nearly half a billion dollars per year from the two casinos they allow to exist, and that doesnt even include the payroll taxes of the employees... that money is not just coming from some Connecticut residents, but also from many New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island residents.
In a time when public sector pension plans are starting to crush nearly every States budgets, its simply laughable when a State allows money to flow to neighboring States unchallenged.
Although it's popular among Fox news viewers to blame the recession on the Fair House Act and political pressure to lend to minorities as you just did, the facts don't back up this argument at all.
The person you are responding to never mentioned the Fair Housing Act, or minorities. You bring it up because it is a red herring that allows you to pretend to defeat his argument.
The fact is that it was the governments guarantees on home loans that for years increased credit availability for home buyers, increasing demand for homes, and thus inflating the prices. The government intervention distorted the market and nothing you are going on about disputes that fact (not like it is disputable anyways.) I am sure your non-FOX friends that like to create red herrings to support their political philosophy when discussing economic policy (of all things) will find some other logical political fallacy for you to believe in, so I am done with your politically motivated (your post = FOX blah blah Republicans blah blah) economic ignorance.
Please come back and talk when you are able to separate economics from politics, but until then shut the fuck up because nobody cares that you hate republicans.
You really arent making sense now, because you just declared that its bad because its even easier to switch between window managers than it is on my linux box.
Just how much ZaRex do you have to drink (it wasn't Kool Aid they drank in Jonestown) to believe that dueling GUIs on the same computer is not a colossally stupid idea?
You mean a dumb idea like how some of us have both Gnome and KDE installed and can switch between them at boot-up?
Just like the AC who posted, I have a Tracfone (mine is essentially a classic Motorola Razr) that only requires an $80/year investment for 480 minutes not counting bonus minutes (generally another 90/year) granted for using promotional codes every 3 months. After 3 years I now have like 1200 minutes saved up.
..and for the record, this is not the cheapest you can get in the prepaid arena. Tracfone is carrier agnostic (will use any of the 3 networks at any time) while some of the carrier-specific prepaid plans work out quite a bit cheaper if you dont use many minutes.
However there is nothing about this that breaks neutrality, which is all about them not LIMITING other services
I agree completely.
A little thought experiment here...
Suppose an ISP offered a flat $1/GB internet access for 10mbit service. No monthly service charge. I think a lot of slashdotters (not me) would sign up for this sort of package in a heartbeat because they would end up paying a lot less for service than they do now.
Now suppose a competing ISP in the area offered the same service, but exempted bandwidth used retrieving email from their own email servers.
My argument is that this "our-email-is-free" exemption is not a network neutrality violation, and I think most slashdotters would agree.
So what is different here with comcast? Well, instead of charging a per-GB fee they (and their competitors) have a monthly service charge, and that we are talking about video instead of email.
So I doint think the core issue is that this is a neutrality violation.. as I dont believe it is. I think the core issue is that comcast may be violating anti-trust laws because they own a significant such a large portion of video content.
I guess that tax payers have no rights that have been violated here?
Unless it is your contention that the IAD was negotiating with the best interests of the tax payers in mind, then I think you should take a big long think about this.
Slashdot Mirror
Where have you been? Fucking mars?
I found those in about 5 seconds with google. Thats 100% first page results. WHAT THE FUCK DUDE? Completely fucking blind much? We've got in there convictions, tens of thousands of out-of-state residents voting, and so on? What the fuck?
Isnt the fact that his citation complete crap enough evidence to lead you to doubt if what he is saying is true? In other words... whats wrong with you? We know whats wrong with him... but you?
No, but they add R's to ends of words.. which might as well be the beginning of the next.. a classic example is the Boston fisherman that calls the fish he catches "tuner" instead of "tuna" .. (and they say "tunah" instead of "tuner" when talking about the radio dial...)
There is a problem with that claim.... EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT YOU, AK MARC (707885), ARE LYING WHEN YOU MAKE THAT CLAIM.
Now lets get on with your OTHER bullshit...
But they were never required, and us non-racists never needed to consider quotas.
Not according to the FUCKING SUPREME COURT. If you are an employer that has ANY minimum qualification standards of any kind, such as requiring a high school diploma, then you damn well better have racial quotas. The court ruled in 1971 that even something simple like requiring a high school diploma is racial discrimination if through the application of that minimum requirement that minorities are adversely effected, even if those adverse effects are not intentional. This was a FINDING OF FACT by the court, asshole.
Now stop being a lying ignorant dumbfuck thats so devoted that he cant be bothered to check facts.
Most Linux distributions do not come with the ability to play DVD's... which makes me wonder what the hell you are talking about. Nobody is going to run to Linux just because Windows doesnt come with a DVD player.
What is wrong with repealing it?
Are you benefiting from racial quotas or something?
If you had not noticed, so is the person you are replying to.
The counter-argumenters will respond to you about indirect benefits. Certainly in the case of schooling they have a valid point. You do benefit from the fact that almost everyone in the country has a basic education, and although its hard to put a value on this benefit it is certainly a significant one when compared to living in any country where almost no one has a basic education.
That isnt to say that everyone should pay the same amount to support the public school system, but it is to say that everyone should be paying at least something because everyone has benefited and does continue to benefit from it. The people that directly use the public school system should be paying more than those that do not, for sure. As usual, the truth turns out to be somewhere in the middle of the extremes.
So, how do you propose that the workers that Microsoft depends on be educated?
The schools in your city or town are run and primarily funded by local property taxes. In general, about 50% of your local property taxes (if you live in America) goes towards the local schools. The correlation between property tax rates and schools is so strong that property taxes are often derived by school district instead of by town or county.
So yeah... I propose that they be educated in schools, and that those schools be funded by people and businesses local to the school.
What does this have to do with Microsoft or the State of Washington? Oh yeah.. you seem to think that if Microsoft didnt pay taxes to the State of Washington, that the town of Redmond isnt doing well with its school district funding. If you look at the home values (median of $452K in 2009) and income levels (median of 88K in 2009) of those that live in the town of Redmond vs State or National averages, then you will see that the town of Redmond is doing very well for itself, and for certain those schools are very well funded even if the tax rates are significantly lower than average.
Are you suggesting that Microsoft in Redmond Washington should be paying something for the schools in Moosup Connecticut?
Raising taxes on Microsoft doesnt end with Balmer deciding between Somalia and America.. Raising taxes on Microsoft ends with Microsoft deciding between Balmer and someone else. Microsoft the corporation doesnt suffer "living conditions" .. only "economic conditions."
The discussion is about State taxes on corporations, but some really fool-hearty people (you ignorants) dont seem to know that there is a real difference between corporations and the executives currently "in charge" like Balmer.
As someone has already asked, how much in taxes would Microsoft (not Balmer) bare before moving out of Washington? The event "Microsoft moves to Somalia" does not equal "Balmer moves to Somalia." nor does the event "Balmer moves to Somalia" equal the event "Microsoft moves to Somalia"
Washington could enact severe personal income taxes without Microsoft giving any shits at all about it. Moving the company because of it wouldnt even be a matter of board room discussion, although maybe the topic of a few board room jokes.
This isnt a race to the bottom. If you dont think that its a good thing that downward pressure exists on taxes because of the competition between tax regions, then lets discuss that.. but I don't think that you want to discuss what you are trying really hard not to even admit to yourself.
Isn't that the right time to ditch a product? If you don't think it's going to work out, it seems much better to ditch it before you launch it.
A team that works for 6 months or even several years will not at the end say "We give up. You blew all that money. Very sorry about that." Someone much higher up than the team, clear of all blame, has made the decision to cancel the project. Good or bad, Google has THAT guy,
Just because we evolved to eat meat doesn't mean we have to eat meat, or even that we should.
You are right.. it doesnt mean that, but it sure as hell is evidence for it.
You have totally mischaracterised the debate. Most scientists aren't shouting about the end of the world -- but /some/ scientists are shouting about doing /something/ to mitigate against future risk.
If we arent actually talking about the scientific version of the apocalypse, then why are we discussing such major sacrifices?
No, because 99.9% of the scientists in relevant fields say the evidence supports it.
ORLY? You couldnt even be bothered to base your very important conclusions on a real number? Carts dont lead horses, boy.
I never said the government didn't bear some responsibility for the housing downturn.
Nobody said that you didn't. Is this an attempt to hide the weakness of your actual argument by sprinkling irrelevant facts that bare no relevance to the discussion at hand? Nobody gives a shit if you said it or not, and nobody claimed that you did or did not because its fucking meaningless.
The point, which seems to have gone completely over your head, is that housing market is cyclical, and downturns happen fairly regularly. What made this one different is that policies - put in place by Republicans - turned the economy into a tinderbox and all that was needed to cause a meltdown was one spark.
The bullshit point you made does not trump simple economics. Supply and demand. The government greatly interfered with the supply of housing credit, causing a bubble many times bigger than is natural. Until you admit to and address this simple fact, you are just blowing partisan political smoke (the fact that you dont like Republicans has nothing to do with the housing bubble, idiot.)
So you feel the need to blame the Republicans for the housing bubble, but you don't even have a fucking clue what caused the bubble to be so big. Obvious partisan rationalizing bullshit is obvious. You are throwing blame without even knowing what, exactly, was the problem. What a fucking tool you are.
with your KDE asnd GNOME applications managed by different task managers.
You are arguing as if this were a good thing. What you seem to be saying is that "yeah Linux currently offers some of the same GUI duality that Windows 8 will, but its worse in Linux because of these other implementation reasons."
I would argue that if Linux is currently doing it poorly, than doing it better is a good idea that the authors of KDE and Gnome should strive for. That the fact that Windows 8 will offer better functionality than what is current in the Linux world is not a mark against Windows 8, but instead a mark against KDE and Gnome (as well as Unity and whatnot.)
This argument that having multiple windowing managers is somehow a bad thing for the users is fairly laughable. Choice is power. Period. When did the Linux crowd forget this?
In fact I hear alot about 'creating jobs', for example recent talks in my state for a casino, even though its a negative sum game.
I was agreeing with you until this..
While casinos do not create wealth, they do concentrate it. When in a situation where neighboring States have already opened casinos or have plans to do so, it would be extremely foolish if your State were to refuse to do the same. The State of Connecticut gets nearly half a billion dollars per year from the two casinos they allow to exist, and that doesnt even include the payroll taxes of the employees... that money is not just coming from some Connecticut residents, but also from many New York, Massachusetts and Rhode Island residents.
In a time when public sector pension plans are starting to crush nearly every States budgets, its simply laughable when a State allows money to flow to neighboring States unchallenged.
Although it's popular among Fox news viewers to blame the recession on the Fair House Act and political pressure to lend to minorities as you just did, the facts don't back up this argument at all.
The person you are responding to never mentioned the Fair Housing Act, or minorities. You bring it up because it is a red herring that allows you to pretend to defeat his argument.
The fact is that it was the governments guarantees on home loans that for years increased credit availability for home buyers, increasing demand for homes, and thus inflating the prices. The government intervention distorted the market and nothing you are going on about disputes that fact (not like it is disputable anyways.) I am sure your non-FOX friends that like to create red herrings to support their political philosophy when discussing economic policy (of all things) will find some other logical political fallacy for you to believe in, so I am done with your politically motivated (your post = FOX blah blah Republicans blah blah) economic ignorance.
Please come back and talk when you are able to separate economics from politics, but until then shut the fuck up because nobody cares that you hate republicans.
Switch between them *during the same session*
You really arent making sense now, because you just declared that its bad because its even easier to switch between window managers than it is on my linux box.
I get it.. you hate having choices.
Just how much ZaRex do you have to drink (it wasn't Kool Aid they drank in Jonestown) to believe that dueling GUIs on the same computer is not a colossally stupid idea?
You mean a dumb idea like how some of us have both Gnome and KDE installed and can switch between them at boot-up?
Who has a $7/month dumbphone plan?
Just like the AC who posted, I have a Tracfone (mine is essentially a classic Motorola Razr) that only requires an $80/year investment for 480 minutes not counting bonus minutes (generally another 90/year) granted for using promotional codes every 3 months. After 3 years I now have like 1200 minutes saved up.
..and for the record, this is not the cheapest you can get in the prepaid arena. Tracfone is carrier agnostic (will use any of the 3 networks at any time) while some of the carrier-specific prepaid plans work out quite a bit cheaper if you dont use many minutes.
Texts cost 30 seconds each.
Sure it will keep things secret.. but its not secure.
However there is nothing about this that breaks neutrality, which is all about them not LIMITING other services
I agree completely.
A little thought experiment here...
Suppose an ISP offered a flat $1/GB internet access for 10mbit service. No monthly service charge. I think a lot of slashdotters (not me) would sign up for this sort of package in a heartbeat because they would end up paying a lot less for service than they do now.
Now suppose a competing ISP in the area offered the same service, but exempted bandwidth used retrieving email from their own email servers.
My argument is that this "our-email-is-free" exemption is not a network neutrality violation, and I think most slashdotters would agree.
So what is different here with comcast? Well, instead of charging a per-GB fee they (and their competitors) have a monthly service charge, and that we are talking about video instead of email.
So I doint think the core issue is that this is a neutrality violation.. as I dont believe it is. I think the core issue is that comcast may be violating anti-trust laws because they own a significant such a large portion of video content.
But making it free bandwidth for your customers
I wouldnt call a monthly service charge "free bandwidth."
I guess that tax payers have no rights that have been violated here?
Unless it is your contention that the IAD was negotiating with the best interests of the tax payers in mind, then I think you should take a big long think about this.