Opinions differ from agendas. Slashdot has many opinions- many of those are moronic as well I will admit. There are relatively few with an agenda though and none with an agenda as obvious as your own.
I am sure you have noticed the number of hateful or sarcastic retorts you get in these threads. The reason is that these people already know you will be commenting in the thread. They already know you will be spreading some specifically worded and one sided statements crafted to direct scorn away from American spying.
The community sees through your dishonesty though. Which is why you so often get reduced to posting with a default rating of -1. Which is when you start popping up in other threads churning out one-liners and populist rhetoric to regenerate your karma.
So you see: it is not that you have a different "opinion" than others that gets you labeled a shill. It is the glaring agenda. You are not as good at concealing it as you think you are. Or, possibly, you are just a lot more sad than the rest of think you are.
In any case, now that you understand the difference between opinion and agenda you can be better at your craft. Maybe you'll even get a raise!
What does renaming a method have to do with their choices on when to hand off to a standards body? The whole point of not being in the hands of a standards body (and until now being below version 1.0) was their ability to make unanimous decisions like this. They want the language to be designed with a singular vision which they believe leads to a stronger language. They even give evidence for this belief.
Look here. The Dart devs have been very open about their goals and their choices. They do plan standardisation and only want to develop the language to where they want it (where they think it will be good enough to drive adoption) before handing it off.
Must be an important story- got you to shill before managing to boost your karma above 0.
Anyone else notice cold fjord's shill/karma-whore cycle? Once their down to -1 you'll start to notice random comments in non-NSA stories that are pointless but good to get karma.
Paid shill or not fjord you have a painfully obvious agenda.
If I am perfectly healthy (which I am) and able to pay my medical bills from my own savings, why should I have to have the added financial burden of paying for YOUR medical bills?
Firstly because you may not be perfectly healthy next month and can very very quickly become bankrupted from the medical bills. Your "I'm not currently sick so fuck everyone" attitude is why everyone laughs at you. It is, quite frankly, shortsighted and idiotic. Secondly: all of society pays for unhealthy people within it in one way or another. Most people that can see things past their own wallet have decided that paying a little bit of money for universal healthcare is the cheapest option. You still seem to think your frothing at the mouth somehow defeats real world data.
It's actually worse than car insurance because the insurance companies are betting you will stay healthy while you are betting you will get sick or injured.
Which is exactly how auto insurance works so I fail to see why that makes it different. It is exactly how all insurance works because that is what insurance is (worded in a super selfish manner of course). As another example why should I be expected to pay for a fire department? My house isn't currently on fire.
No one gives a shit about why you think America broke away from England. It is entirely irrelevant to the discussion of whether universal health care is good or not. "blah blah [largely uninformed understanding of history] blah blah Church of England" is not reasoning or an argument. It is you knowing you don't have a point to make but pulling one out of your ass anyway.
Really? Explain how that works.... The car I drive?
Police services, fire department, numerous other requirements for other things. They certainly do tell you what car you are allowed to drive. How ignorant can you be? Nice way to conveniently ignore all the regulations in that area.
No, I oppose being told I have to pay for your health insurance while you can continue to smoke, be obese, be an alcoholic or do drugs without having to change your ways
This is a blatant strawman you fool. Stop using them. Not only is it pointless and utter bullshit it's clearly not the real reason you oppose it. Why is auto insurance okay? Why don't you mind paying for auto insurance so other people can be bad drivers?
No, they're not. Americans eating junk food has a very high correlation to bad health.
Which had absolutely nothing to do with how you were comparing them. That two things can be tangentially related in one way does not mean they can be compared equivalently in an unrelated way. The fact that I called it "unhealthy" was to show you I understood that it was related to health. What it is not related to is universal health care. Evidently you missed that.
Considering UACA doesn't keep costs down or make people productive, it's a moot point.
It fails because fools like you force it to. The rest of the world seems to handle it fine, remember?
As to the crime issue, if you mean people who deliberately commit a crime so they can go to jail to get medical help [blah blah strawman blah blah]
There you go with your fantasy world again. Ignoring the fact that they may not be able to get a job which seems to be the case for a lot of Americans. You have quite the unemployment rate. I'd think if all the unemployed people had jobs waiting for them your labour market would collapse from lack of people. We have already established they are sick though (need healthcare, remember?). Many times sick people can't work for several reasons.
The "fuck you; I got mine" attitude will work great for you I'm sure. Up until you get sick or your country degenerates so far someone bats you in the back the head with a pipe (w
That's spelling not communication. Anyone half literate would understand the intended meaning perfectly. If small spelling mistakes that are trivially corrected by the phonetic value cause you communication problems then I would say it is you with the poor communication skills. Do you make everyone write things down so you don't get confused by homonyms?
Further, the car analogy fails because there is no government requiring you to own a car.
No it doesn't. You don't have to own a car but it is, however, a fact of life that you have to be alive to have life. In that sense health insurance is far more important than auto insurance.
The rest of your post continues to illustrate my point. You keep throwing out strawmen like "nanny state" and "insinuate itself into every minute aspect of ones[sic] life". That's not reasoning; that's manipulation. You rabidly shoot(updated for American audiences) your nose off to spite your face for some dogmatic ideal of "freedom". The rest of the world sees through these political and corporate planted "opinions" as nothing more than a way to protect profits. The American people want universal health care- they're just too dogmatically opposed to certain words to be able to explain it without huge amounts of cognitive dissonance. Which is trivial to see in your post. You don't make rational statements; you make emotional pleas.
Your government tells you what to do and buy all the time you twit and probably on the high end of the spectrum compared to other western countries. You don't oppose health care for "freedom" and you know it. You oppose it because you are told to.
Just because something is successful doesn't necessarily make it a good thing. By that logic the success of McDonald's hamburgers is a good thing for the food industry.
That's a pretty glaring false equivalence. Health care and unhealthy American food are pretty much as far apart as things can get. But if you would care to explain how keeping society healthy and productive, doing it cheaper than the American system and reducing crime is not a good thing then I would love to hear it. I'm sorry helping your neighbour occasionally is un-American but it's just part of being a civilized nation.
The difference is meaningless. Those sick people are still society's problem even if they haven't bought into private insurance (possibly a larger problem). Society is, by definition, a group effort and you just can't opt out of every part of it just because you want to save some money.
I assume that in United States' law you are required to hold private insurance on your motor vehicle? We do in my country and although annoying it certainly hasn't destroyed civilization. Nor has a universal health care system. This is where the "mountains of contradictory evidence" comes in. Many places in the world use these systems and they end up being much more successful than the American "pass the buck" system. How can you continue to assert the awfulness of these systems when they've proven themselves highly successful?
Maybe the people that need to "sit down and shut up" are the ones that are hysterically shouting doom over something most other western nations have enjoyed for years.
Oh Americans- I really don't know if there is anyone better a spewing nonsense and strawmen in the face of mountains of contradictory evidence. It's nice you can go off on diatribes about obese alcoholic drug addicts but those really aren't much of an issue. Even healthy people can get sick (and often do).
I assume since you assert that no one else is your responsibility you also don't think you are theirs. I hope you have never had insurance of any kind and if you were forced to then you better have never made a claim. Insurance means having other people help with the costs when you need it while helping them with theirs while you do not. How else do you think a few dollars a month can pay for medical bills costing hundreds of thousands?
It's nice you live in a little fantasy world but here in reality if people really need something they will take it with force. Most civilised nations have discovered it is best to try and provide what people need rather than to assume they'll just roll over and die. That's where an individual's problem becomes everyone's. You can either pay a few dollars to help the problem or deal with high crime rates.
Your friends scribbled "Vodka" across a bottle of water and then spent the rest of the week laughing at you behind your back. You aren't going to come to a place like Slashdot making magical claims about being immune to alcohol and have anyone think you're anything more than an idiot.
Why would the battery die? Forgot to charge it? Forgot to turn it off? Random failure? All red herrings which was my point in bringing up being blown away in a storm. A paper map is not "far superior" to a GPS device it merely has different failure points.
It's likely easier to get a GPS lock in "middle of the mountains" than it is to pinpoint yourself on a map from landmarks or dead reckoning. When your map blows away in a storm or otherwise gets easily destroyed you'll be damn glad you have a backlit GPS device that knows exactly where you are.
Well I guess technically you do have the right to act like an indignant brat in much the same way as you have the right to run around screaming to the world you have the mental development of a six year old. Not many would consider it wise, intelligent or rational, however.
So let me get this straight: you brazenly announce that everyone whom doesn't think like you is a short-sighted, "cluiquish" moron simply because they don't think like you and are not part of your little clique? Is it really me that "can't get over lecturing other people on what they're allowed to think"? I just don't think you should consider everyone that disagrees with you wrong and a moron. That's not exactly a lecture. For instance: I don't think you are a moron for disagreeing with me. I think you are a moron because you ramble on about things that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, contradict yourself and, to repeat myself, act like an indignant brat.
A lot of people want that stuff to exist forever. They want to go through their history and relive the memories, see old photos and laugh at old jokes.
You have every right not to use facebook. You are not entitled to act all indignant because someone didn't know or forgot that you refuse to use the same means of communication as so many others.
I'm not sure I follow your ramblings but you seem to be insinuating that pointing out arrogance is arrogant or somehow lacking in humility. Is that correct? Parent poster seemed confused as to why people might find their views arrogant. I pointed out why- it's because they are arrogant.
That last bit is very confusing. Am I to take you that you believe I follow your parody? Because I would point out that many people enjoy centralised social interaction like church, mall, pub, school, facebook, etc. and looking down upon them for that is rightfully viewed as arrogant?
Your snarky diatribe seems to describe yourself more than it does me. You felt the need to jump in with an empty attack for seemingly no other reason than my questioning of your believed superiority for being counter-culture.
The reason it is easily confused with arrogance might have something to do with:
Among the people who are hooked on social media, all of the above
Likewise, nobody expects to have a conversation to know the news anymore they expect it to come delivered to them in their Facebook stream.
Either way there's a huge amount of peer pressure and if I was younger and more impressionable...
The fact that you look down upon people as lazy and having less mental fortitude than you because you refuse to use facebook is pretty arrogant. Demanding your friends jump through hoops to keep you in the loop is arrogant (amoung a few other things). That you view people that use facebook as impressionable or someway less than you is arrogant.
Heaven forbid people want a convenient place to bring together their interpersonal relationships.
Of course not. The scientists just haven't found the "Truth" yet.
Put another way: science is wrong until it agrees with my arbitrary beliefs. The largest problem with "believers of particular religions" is that they actually think this is a wise outlook on life.
Clearly there is customer demand for such a service. Maybe they should knock off the cartel crap and start selling their products the way people want them. It would be much easier to get rid of places like isoHunt if they actually had a competing service.
You can buy just the money. Presumably since they think digital copies of a thing are worth so much they would be okay with a scan of the $500 bill though. Then they could make as many as they wanted.
Slashdot Mirror
Opinions differ from agendas. Slashdot has many opinions- many of those are moronic as well I will admit. There are relatively few with an agenda though and none with an agenda as obvious as your own.
I am sure you have noticed the number of hateful or sarcastic retorts you get in these threads. The reason is that these people already know you will be commenting in the thread. They already know you will be spreading some specifically worded and one sided statements crafted to direct scorn away from American spying.
The community sees through your dishonesty though. Which is why you so often get reduced to posting with a default rating of -1. Which is when you start popping up in other threads churning out one-liners and populist rhetoric to regenerate your karma.
So you see: it is not that you have a different "opinion" than others that gets you labeled a shill. It is the glaring agenda. You are not as good at concealing it as you think you are. Or, possibly, you are just a lot more sad than the rest of think you are.
In any case, now that you understand the difference between opinion and agenda you can be better at your craft. Maybe you'll even get a raise!
What does renaming a method have to do with their choices on when to hand off to a standards body? The whole point of not being in the hands of a standards body (and until now being below version 1.0) was their ability to make unanimous decisions like this. They want the language to be designed with a singular vision which they believe leads to a stronger language. They even give evidence for this belief.
Look here. The Dart devs have been very open about their goals and their choices. They do plan standardisation and only want to develop the language to where they want it (where they think it will be good enough to drive adoption) before handing it off.
Must be an important story- got you to shill before managing to boost your karma above 0.
Anyone else notice cold fjord's shill/karma-whore cycle? Once their down to -1 you'll start to notice random comments in non-NSA stories that are pointless but good to get karma.
Paid shill or not fjord you have a painfully obvious agenda.
If I am perfectly healthy (which I am) and able to pay my medical bills from my own savings, why should I have to have the added financial burden of paying for YOUR medical bills?
Firstly because you may not be perfectly healthy next month and can very very quickly become bankrupted from the medical bills. Your "I'm not currently sick so fuck everyone" attitude is why everyone laughs at you. It is, quite frankly, shortsighted and idiotic. Secondly: all of society pays for unhealthy people within it in one way or another. Most people that can see things past their own wallet have decided that paying a little bit of money for universal healthcare is the cheapest option. You still seem to think your frothing at the mouth somehow defeats real world data.
It's actually worse than car insurance because the insurance companies are betting you will stay healthy while you are betting you will get sick or injured.
Which is exactly how auto insurance works so I fail to see why that makes it different. It is exactly how all insurance works because that is what insurance is (worded in a super selfish manner of course). As another example why should I be expected to pay for a fire department? My house isn't currently on fire.
No one gives a shit about why you think America broke away from England. It is entirely irrelevant to the discussion of whether universal health care is good or not. "blah blah [largely uninformed understanding of history] blah blah Church of England" is not reasoning or an argument. It is you knowing you don't have a point to make but pulling one out of your ass anyway.
Really? Explain how that works. ... The car I drive?
Police services, fire department, numerous other requirements for other things. They certainly do tell you what car you are allowed to drive. How ignorant can you be? Nice way to conveniently ignore all the regulations in that area.
No, I oppose being told I have to pay for your health insurance while you can continue to smoke, be obese, be an alcoholic or do drugs without having to change your ways
This is a blatant strawman you fool. Stop using them. Not only is it pointless and utter bullshit it's clearly not the real reason you oppose it. Why is auto insurance okay? Why don't you mind paying for auto insurance so other people can be bad drivers?
No, they're not. Americans eating junk food has a very high correlation to bad health.
Which had absolutely nothing to do with how you were comparing them. That two things can be tangentially related in one way does not mean they can be compared equivalently in an unrelated way. The fact that I called it "unhealthy" was to show you I understood that it was related to health. What it is not related to is universal health care. Evidently you missed that.
Considering UACA doesn't keep costs down or make people productive, it's a moot point.
It fails because fools like you force it to. The rest of the world seems to handle it fine, remember?
As to the crime issue, if you mean people who deliberately commit a crime so they can go to jail to get medical help [blah blah strawman blah blah]
There you go with your fantasy world again. Ignoring the fact that they may not be able to get a job which seems to be the case for a lot of Americans. You have quite the unemployment rate. I'd think if all the unemployed people had jobs waiting for them your labour market would collapse from lack of people. We have already established they are sick though (need healthcare, remember?). Many times sick people can't work for several reasons.
The "fuck you; I got mine" attitude will work great for you I'm sure. Up until you get sick or your country degenerates so far someone bats you in the back the head with a pipe (w
Perhaps it doesn't exist because making a usable system "secure" in every variable definition of the word is impossible.
That's spelling not communication. Anyone half literate would understand the intended meaning perfectly. If small spelling mistakes that are trivially corrected by the phonetic value cause you communication problems then I would say it is you with the poor communication skills. Do you make everyone write things down so you don't get confused by homonyms?
Further, the car analogy fails because there is no government requiring you to own a car.
No it doesn't. You don't have to own a car but it is, however, a fact of life that you have to be alive to have life. In that sense health insurance is far more important than auto insurance.
The rest of your post continues to illustrate my point. You keep throwing out strawmen like "nanny state" and "insinuate itself into every minute aspect of ones[sic] life". That's not reasoning; that's manipulation. You rabidly shoot(updated for American audiences) your nose off to spite your face for some dogmatic ideal of "freedom". The rest of the world sees through these political and corporate planted "opinions" as nothing more than a way to protect profits. The American people want universal health care- they're just too dogmatically opposed to certain words to be able to explain it without huge amounts of cognitive dissonance. Which is trivial to see in your post. You don't make rational statements; you make emotional pleas.
Your government tells you what to do and buy all the time you twit and probably on the high end of the spectrum compared to other western countries. You don't oppose health care for "freedom" and you know it. You oppose it because you are told to.
Just because something is successful doesn't necessarily make it a good thing. By that logic the success of McDonald's hamburgers is a good thing for the food industry.
That's a pretty glaring false equivalence. Health care and unhealthy American food are pretty much as far apart as things can get. But if you would care to explain how keeping society healthy and productive, doing it cheaper than the American system and reducing crime is not a good thing then I would love to hear it. I'm sorry helping your neighbour occasionally is un-American but it's just part of being a civilized nation.
The difference is meaningless. Those sick people are still society's problem even if they haven't bought into private insurance (possibly a larger problem). Society is, by definition, a group effort and you just can't opt out of every part of it just because you want to save some money.
I assume that in United States' law you are required to hold private insurance on your motor vehicle? We do in my country and although annoying it certainly hasn't destroyed civilization. Nor has a universal health care system. This is where the "mountains of contradictory evidence" comes in. Many places in the world use these systems and they end up being much more successful than the American "pass the buck" system. How can you continue to assert the awfulness of these systems when they've proven themselves highly successful?
Maybe the people that need to "sit down and shut up" are the ones that are hysterically shouting doom over something most other western nations have enjoyed for years.
Oh Americans- I really don't know if there is anyone better a spewing nonsense and strawmen in the face of mountains of contradictory evidence. It's nice you can go off on diatribes about obese alcoholic drug addicts but those really aren't much of an issue. Even healthy people can get sick (and often do).
I assume since you assert that no one else is your responsibility you also don't think you are theirs. I hope you have never had insurance of any kind and if you were forced to then you better have never made a claim. Insurance means having other people help with the costs when you need it while helping them with theirs while you do not. How else do you think a few dollars a month can pay for medical bills costing hundreds of thousands?
It's nice you live in a little fantasy world but here in reality if people really need something they will take it with force. Most civilised nations have discovered it is best to try and provide what people need rather than to assume they'll just roll over and die. That's where an individual's problem becomes everyone's. You can either pay a few dollars to help the problem or deal with high crime rates.
Your friends scribbled "Vodka" across a bottle of water and then spent the rest of the week laughing at you behind your back. You aren't going to come to a place like Slashdot making magical claims about being immune to alcohol and have anyone think you're anything more than an idiot.
Yes, because what your country needs is even more people lacking in an education and incapable of raising themselves above the level of their parents.
It's even more terrifying that this nonsense got modded interesting.
Unfortunately calling your customers names and stamping your feet doesn't pay many bills.
Why would the battery die? Forgot to charge it? Forgot to turn it off? Random failure? All red herrings which was my point in bringing up being blown away in a storm. A paper map is not "far superior" to a GPS device it merely has different failure points.
It's likely easier to get a GPS lock in "middle of the mountains" than it is to pinpoint yourself on a map from landmarks or dead reckoning. When your map blows away in a storm or otherwise gets easily destroyed you'll be damn glad you have a backlit GPS device that knows exactly where you are.
Well I guess technically you do have the right to act like an indignant brat in much the same way as you have the right to run around screaming to the world you have the mental development of a six year old. Not many would consider it wise, intelligent or rational, however.
So let me get this straight: you brazenly announce that everyone whom doesn't think like you is a short-sighted, "cluiquish" moron simply because they don't think like you and are not part of your little clique? Is it really me that "can't get over lecturing other people on what they're allowed to think"? I just don't think you should consider everyone that disagrees with you wrong and a moron. That's not exactly a lecture. For instance: I don't think you are a moron for disagreeing with me. I think you are a moron because you ramble on about things that have nothing to do with the topic at hand, contradict yourself and, to repeat myself, act like an indignant brat.
A lot of people want that stuff to exist forever. They want to go through their history and relive the memories, see old photos and laugh at old jokes.
You have every right not to use facebook. You are not entitled to act all indignant because someone didn't know or forgot that you refuse to use the same means of communication as so many others.
I'm not sure I follow your ramblings but you seem to be insinuating that pointing out arrogance is arrogant or somehow lacking in humility. Is that correct? Parent poster seemed confused as to why people might find their views arrogant. I pointed out why- it's because they are arrogant.
That last bit is very confusing. Am I to take you that you believe I follow your parody? Because I would point out that many people enjoy centralised social interaction like church, mall, pub, school, facebook, etc. and looking down upon them for that is rightfully viewed as arrogant?
Your snarky diatribe seems to describe yourself more than it does me. You felt the need to jump in with an empty attack for seemingly no other reason than my questioning of your believed superiority for being counter-culture.
The reason it is easily confused with arrogance might have something to do with:
Among the people who are hooked on social media, all of the above
Likewise, nobody expects to have a conversation to know the news anymore they expect it to come delivered to them in their Facebook stream.
Either way there's a huge amount of peer pressure and if I was younger and more impressionable ...
The fact that you look down upon people as lazy and having less mental fortitude than you because you refuse to use facebook is pretty arrogant. Demanding your friends jump through hoops to keep you in the loop is arrogant (amoung a few other things). That you view people that use facebook as impressionable or someway less than you is arrogant.
Heaven forbid people want a convenient place to bring together their interpersonal relationships.
1) I could find you a BMW for 5 grand. Do I get a finder's fee?
2) Is someone whom builds a replica car a thief?
Yes. The way they expect it to work. Which is often quite different from how another will expect it to work.
Good customization accommodates both with minimal effort to either.
Complex enough that you are so entirely ignorant of intellectual property law that you actually think your sentence describes it.
Of course not. The scientists just haven't found the "Truth" yet.
Put another way: science is wrong until it agrees with my arbitrary beliefs. The largest problem with "believers of particular religions" is that they actually think this is a wise outlook on life.
Clearly there is customer demand for such a service. Maybe they should knock off the cartel crap and start selling their products the way people want them. It would be much easier to get rid of places like isoHunt if they actually had a competing service.
You can buy just the money. Presumably since they think digital copies of a thing are worth so much they would be okay with a scan of the $500 bill though. Then they could make as many as they wanted.