To bring it full circle... you made a logical decision to do x, this sets a rule in your mind that x is true. Once you made x decision, you had no further reason to question that, and you would base many more decisions on that "logical rule". When x is challanged, it would require you to re-think all past decisions that were based on x, which might include who you married, why you took this job, your religious beliefs and other important life decisions.
Is it any wonder our minds are wired to assume we were right and keep on moving in the same directions? The brain is trying to keep you alive; anything you have done up to this point won't kill you, so why would the brain try to change that? That's why few people really have a life changing moment unless forced upon them by war, death, or other bad things. When the going is good, you will keep going.
Isn't it pretty well established that many of the works in the bible were not recorded until years after the fact, sometimes hundreds of years? And take his "study the bible" with a huge grain of salt. That means read it, apply our values to what it says, and further our agenda. If they really wanted to learn, they would actively allow and encourage the "questioning" of their faith/beliefs. They would also at least learn about another religion; however that would probably highlight all the stupid stuff that goes along with religion, so I haven't seen that happen at many churches.
Well put. The fact is the people who are closest to the situation (doctors, nurses, even up to hospital administrators) should not have complete authority to do as they wish. Very often there is conflicting interest and this is where the government is SUPPOSED to step in and ensure the safety of citizens. I would use the same argument for Net Neutrality (don't really want MSN, ABC, Yahoo, Cisco, Comcast, ATT and others deciding the direction of the internet)!
homosexuals historically have not had the right to marry. And with a reason....
Gay rights is hipocrisy at its high, as they really don't care to hear the reasonings of the other side...
I believe gay marriage is negative to the society...
Marriage has a purpose and that purpose is not fulfilled in gay couples.
And I am waiting for this reason. What are your "reasonings" Mr. AC? I am waiting! How is it negative; what does it not fulfill? You didn't say!
For the "it's for procreation" people, why haven't we made sterile people marry only other sterile people?
First off, most of the people you are taunting probably don't give a flying fuck who someone wants to marry. Certainly every relativist is in this category, and I think when it comes to bedroom behavior most of us are relativist (nobody wants the gov't intruding there, right?). Sister, cousin, ape, real doll(TM)... none of it matters to me. As long as you are happy, and not removing any of my rights (or others), we are cool.
Now, even if you didn't like that reason, here's another: incest/inbreeding does cause harm to future generations, this is fact. Homosexuality however cannot cause this problem as they haven't figured out how to reproduce yet.
So there is a law somewhat related to this that actually serves to protect society. What's your point?
So throw out the winner, then number two looks great! Not to mention Dell, HP, etc. don't write the software, they only sell it with their hardware (sorta). You can't compare the profitability of Apple, with the iPhone, iPod, computer hardware, and the whole software stack as their own to make money off of to a hardware/resale company like dell (might as well compare to cdw). You could compare it to Dell+MS. Apple "lost" the "PC war", but they have found many other ways to make money. So has TI, Xerox, IBM, and all the other players from back in the day (well, not ALL).
Knowing so much about the constitution, then surely you understand it was never meant to list all the rights of citizens. The initial goal was a list of rights that the government was allowed to do. The bill of rights was actually contested because some did not want to mistakenly give the impression these were the only rights we had; I agree with that. The same line of reasoning has been used for the "general welfare" clause. That vague term has caused much debate, and will for years to come.
But it's all for not. Tell, me should we take Madison's words to heart? If so can I also walk out to the vally and shoot a buffalo to feed my family? Can I go the river and catch a fish to feed my family? Not without government approval (fishing license). The point is times have changed... you can't just say fuck it, move to the wild and live off the land. It is just as the last paragraph of your post states, when you no longer live in a rural wilderness, you have to start acting civil.
Well, technically there is no such thing as un-biased. No matter how relativist you are... you have social standards that make it into the reporting. To use the extreme example, is mass murder reported as a bad thing? Surely an un-biased news cast would only present the facts, and have a long statement by the killer to defend his position, right?
You do realize the unemployment, deficit, bailouts, and even the Czar's are pretty much the fault of the previous 8 years (and before too). Obama didn't have any control over most of that stuff, other than a twinge of truth in the Czar issue.
The marketers may have got the word out, but the PR team is pissed now. This is a huge issue in the modeling community, and this will not be seen as a good thing for RL in the industry, or by the customers that also care about this issue. Yeah it RL all over, but didn't we all know who he was anyways... Your assertion that is good for the company would only be true if we didn't know who the fuck he was before this happened... that called viral, and is different than Streisand.
Well, you basically are doing the same thing, only with a different base perspective. A marketing guy would tell you that you're crazy to not dress provacative... it will have poeple coming by your office, wanting to chat with you, include you on projects, etc. All for nothing that has anything to do with your abilities. The same can be said for someone who is "professional" or "clean cut". While those might be good for meeting clients and again the marketing guy loves them, but to us who work behind the scenes, and know we can get away wearing jeans a t-shirt, it's the same as you not showing some cleavage.
I am on board for Network Neutrality, but I have a hard time blaming the company whose network takes over a minute to email a 1.3mp image. I really don't see how it would handle VOIP and if my emails start taking 10 minutes to go through, I am gonna be pissed and switch carriers.
I think expanding network neutrality arguments to cell networks is a little over-reaching.
You must not actually work with mobile computing devices... Windows Mobile runs on nearly every delivery handheld (I think UPS has a proprietary system, though). Symbol, Intermec, Motorola all make "rugged" equipment for delivery drivers, traveling salesmen, and other on-the-road jobs. Almost all are Windows Mobile.
And quite frankly, I am glad. I don't know why WM gets such a bad rap here (well, yeah I do)... It's quickly become the only mobile platform where you don't have to sign an agreement and distribute your app through some store. Any one of us can download VS c# express and pound out an app for it in an hour (or so). Of course, now WM is getting a marketplace, so who knows what will happen.
WM might not be the best, it might not have the flashy aspects of android or the iphone, but for a business to get work done it is a (the only?) viable solution at this time. Android might be the best competitor.
I think you are correct, and I would like to add... Can this senator show me letters from his constituents showing their dire need for this bill passed? Is this really what "the people" want? Didn't think so...
Then the program checks if the flag is set and if so turns on led, right? That's a comparison, which IIRC boils down to binary subtraction.
Every sql statement is evaluated and executed based on tons of math... every string operations is tons of math... basically there is nothing you do that doesn't boil down to math at somepoint on a computer.
You know though... in rural areas privately owned antennas aren't unusual. They are usually for TV, but increasingly used for point-to-point wireless broadband to a local ISP. If we could add a permanent backbone, either using an internet connection or continuing the mesh theme connecting to other towers, or both that could be enough to cover the whole little town with some solid connections to nearby towns. Seems somewhat doable, but I would worry about permits, regulations and such.
Slashdot Mirror
To bring it full circle... you made a logical decision to do x, this sets a rule in your mind that x is true. Once you made x decision, you had no further reason to question that, and you would base many more decisions on that "logical rule". When x is challanged, it would require you to re-think all past decisions that were based on x, which might include who you married, why you took this job, your religious beliefs and other important life decisions.
Is it any wonder our minds are wired to assume we were right and keep on moving in the same directions? The brain is trying to keep you alive; anything you have done up to this point won't kill you, so why would the brain try to change that? That's why few people really have a life changing moment unless forced upon them by war, death, or other bad things. When the going is good, you will keep going.
Well, you were doing it wrong. I don't know how, but you were. Also, use an apple next time... might get some vitamins with it!
Isn't it pretty well established that many of the works in the bible were not recorded until years after the fact, sometimes hundreds of years? And take his "study the bible" with a huge grain of salt. That means read it, apply our values to what it says, and further our agenda. If they really wanted to learn, they would actively allow and encourage the "questioning" of their faith/beliefs. They would also at least learn about another religion; however that would probably highlight all the stupid stuff that goes along with religion, so I haven't seen that happen at many churches.
Ehh, you and your fucking rope.
Well put. The fact is the people who are closest to the situation (doctors, nurses, even up to hospital administrators) should not have complete authority to do as they wish. Very often there is conflicting interest and this is where the government is SUPPOSED to step in and ensure the safety of citizens. I would use the same argument for Net Neutrality (don't really want MSN, ABC, Yahoo, Cisco, Comcast, ATT and others deciding the direction of the internet)!
Nah, he's just gone wayward.
homosexuals historically have not had the right to marry. And with a reason....
Gay rights is hipocrisy at its high, as they really don't care to hear the reasonings of the other side...
I believe gay marriage is negative to the society...
Marriage has a purpose and that purpose is not fulfilled in gay couples.
And I am waiting for this reason. What are your "reasonings" Mr. AC? I am waiting! How is it negative; what does it not fulfill? You didn't say!
For the "it's for procreation" people, why haven't we made sterile people marry only other sterile people?
First off, most of the people you are taunting probably don't give a flying fuck who someone wants to marry. Certainly every relativist is in this category, and I think when it comes to bedroom behavior most of us are relativist (nobody wants the gov't intruding there, right?). Sister, cousin, ape, real doll(TM)... none of it matters to me. As long as you are happy, and not removing any of my rights (or others), we are cool.
Now, even if you didn't like that reason, here's another: incest/inbreeding does cause harm to future generations, this is fact. Homosexuality however cannot cause this problem as they haven't figured out how to reproduce yet.
So there is a law somewhat related to this that actually serves to protect society. What's your point?
So throw out the winner, then number two looks great! Not to mention Dell, HP, etc. don't write the software, they only sell it with their hardware (sorta). You can't compare the profitability of Apple, with the iPhone, iPod, computer hardware, and the whole software stack as their own to make money off of to a hardware/resale company like dell (might as well compare to cdw). You could compare it to Dell+MS. Apple "lost" the "PC war", but they have found many other ways to make money. So has TI, Xerox, IBM, and all the other players from back in the day (well, not ALL).
They claim GPLv3 and AGPLv3 are much better suited for the realities of modern open source software.
...
"At that time, open source was not something as broadly used as it is now."
Maybe the way it was written is why FOSS is where it's at? Might not be such a bad idea to keep it around?
Knowing so much about the constitution, then surely you understand it was never meant to list all the rights of citizens. The initial goal was a list of rights that the government was allowed to do. The bill of rights was actually contested because some did not want to mistakenly give the impression these were the only rights we had; I agree with that. The same line of reasoning has been used for the "general welfare" clause. That vague term has caused much debate, and will for years to come.
But it's all for not. Tell, me should we take Madison's words to heart? If so can I also walk out to the vally and shoot a buffalo to feed my family? Can I go the river and catch a fish to feed my family? Not without government approval (fishing license). The point is times have changed... you can't just say fuck it, move to the wild and live off the land. It is just as the last paragraph of your post states, when you no longer live in a rural wilderness, you have to start acting civil.
Were they gonna give that liver to Jobs to make sure Apple didn't die and leave only MS? Pretty smart, these forbes guys.
He's a loser. FAIL.
Well, technically there is no such thing as un-biased. No matter how relativist you are... you have social standards that make it into the reporting. To use the extreme example, is mass murder reported as a bad thing? Surely an un-biased news cast would only present the facts, and have a long statement by the killer to defend his position, right?
You do realize the unemployment, deficit, bailouts, and even the Czar's are pretty much the fault of the previous 8 years (and before too). Obama didn't have any control over most of that stuff, other than a twinge of truth in the Czar issue.
The more likely you are to have errors. I would love to see a chart of patches released over time... anyone put that together yet?
The marketers may have got the word out, but the PR team is pissed now. This is a huge issue in the modeling community, and this will not be seen as a good thing for RL in the industry, or by the customers that also care about this issue. Yeah it RL all over, but didn't we all know who he was anyways... Your assertion that is good for the company would only be true if we didn't know who the fuck he was before this happened... that called viral, and is different than Streisand.
Well, you basically are doing the same thing, only with a different base perspective. A marketing guy would tell you that you're crazy to not dress provacative... it will have poeple coming by your office, wanting to chat with you, include you on projects, etc. All for nothing that has anything to do with your abilities. The same can be said for someone who is "professional" or "clean cut". While those might be good for meeting clients and again the marketing guy loves them, but to us who work behind the scenes, and know we can get away wearing jeans a t-shirt, it's the same as you not showing some cleavage.
I am on board for Network Neutrality, but I have a hard time blaming the company whose network takes over a minute to email a 1.3mp image. I really don't see how it would handle VOIP and if my emails start taking 10 minutes to go through, I am gonna be pissed and switch carriers.
I think expanding network neutrality arguments to cell networks is a little over-reaching.
You must not actually work with mobile computing devices... Windows Mobile runs on nearly every delivery handheld (I think UPS has a proprietary system, though). Symbol, Intermec, Motorola all make "rugged" equipment for delivery drivers, traveling salesmen, and other on-the-road jobs. Almost all are Windows Mobile.
And quite frankly, I am glad. I don't know why WM gets such a bad rap here (well, yeah I do)... It's quickly become the only mobile platform where you don't have to sign an agreement and distribute your app through some store. Any one of us can download VS c# express and pound out an app for it in an hour (or so). Of course, now WM is getting a marketplace, so who knows what will happen.
WM might not be the best, it might not have the flashy aspects of android or the iphone, but for a business to get work done it is a (the only?) viable solution at this time. Android might be the best competitor.
I think you are correct, and I would like to add... Can this senator show me letters from his constituents showing their dire need for this bill passed? Is this really what "the people" want? Didn't think so...
That's simply due to the available medium... if the Yukon Quest didn't have such high latency, more people would probably use digital news sources.
set flag=1
Then the program checks if the flag is set and if so turns on led, right? That's a comparison, which IIRC boils down to binary subtraction.
Every sql statement is evaluated and executed based on tons of math... every string operations is tons of math... basically there is nothing you do that doesn't boil down to math at somepoint on a computer.
At the rate this idiocy is going it won't be long until directors of failed corporations get charged with manslaughter or murder....
Don't count on that... the main purpose of a corporation is to protect the shareholders and employees. And they have a lot of money, too.
You know though... in rural areas privately owned antennas aren't unusual. They are usually for TV, but increasingly used for point-to-point wireless broadband to a local ISP. If we could add a permanent backbone, either using an internet connection or continuing the mesh theme connecting to other towers, or both that could be enough to cover the whole little town with some solid connections to nearby towns. Seems somewhat doable, but I would worry about permits, regulations and such.