Not true. Synaptic / Yum make getting and installing software a snap -- all you have to do is say "Hey, here's something many versions of linux have built in -- a way to get software downloaded and installed with no hassle at all", show installing something (pick something small so there's no huge download / install time for the viewer to wait) and you're done. You don't need to show them all the different GUI's or any other programs because most people not already using linux aren't going to CARE about those things. However, being able to get FREE software and install it without having to click through EULA's or "yes/no" boxes WILL be of interest to many people.
What traumatic things, may I ask? I've been on the internet with no restrictions since I was fairly young and most people first heard of the internet -- and the only "traumatic" thing I can think of that I've seen is tubgirl, and all that does is make you go "wow, that's nasty" and then you close the window and forget about it.
I told a friend about the Antikythera mechanism a few years back when I first heard about it on the History Channel. His response? "Impossible. People hadn't evolved enough back then to have built something like that".
Just curious since this is a "true story" of yours (not saying it's not), but what state did it happen in? 32 states in the US have the age of consent at 16, and another 7 have it at 17. Odds are for most people that you live in a state where they don't have to be 18 to be legal. Depending on what state your friend lived in, he could sue the Sheriff.
Agreed, especially when it comes to games (and supporting older games). I spent a whole day tracking down drivers for each part in my new laptop so that I could install XP and ditch Vista due to Vista's crap performance with games. Other than that it was alright, nothing HORRIBLE, but nothing stellar either. The last straw for me though was when I installed Diablo 2 and once you log onto battle.net with it the game drops to about 2 frames per second. That was when Vista went bye-bye.
Sorry, but while irritating, not maintaining a constant speed (or even getting up to the speed limit) isn't dangerous driving. Do I hate it when some idiot's on the phone and is doing 35 in a 55 zone? Sure. Do I want to hit him? You bet. Is he driving dangerously? Nope.
Driving fast is not in itself very dangerous (until you get to ridiculous speeds, such as the top speed of a Bugatti Veyron and have extremely short reaction times). What IS dangerous is tailgating, driving faster than your car is capable, driving faster than road conditions permit, or driving faster than YOU are capable of.
There's a reason why in Germany they focus more on tickets for tailgating than tickets for speeding on the Autobahn (and yes the speeding only applies to the restricted sections). Two cars driven by halfway competent people in capable cars at 100 mph aren't any more likely to crash than if they were doing 65 mph. However, if the one car is driving a foot behind the other car like many morons do, then it IS dangerous because there's no time to hit the brakes if the first car needs to slow down.
The problem isn't speed, it's people not leaving a safe distance to allow for stopping in an emergency.
Not trying to be mean, but if you can't even have the radio on while driving or you crash, you shouldn't be driving then. Same goes for CdBee who also replied to you. If you're that easily distracted, you're no safer behind the wheel than a person with narcolepsy.
The problem with these studies is that they always assume that people (and when doing tests such as Mythbusters did prevent the test subject from) can not / will not say "hold on" and put the phone down when they need to concentrate or if it's an emergency just drop the phone.
My car is a manual and I rarely talk on the phone when I'm not on the highway (for obvious reasons). On the rare occasions that I am on it while not cruising at a constant speed, if I need to make a sharp enough turn that I need both hands or shift gears I simply say "hang on a sec", drop the phone in my lap, do what I need to do, and when I'm free to use the phone again I do so.
You cite the Mythbusters test, yet if the drivers had been allowed to drop the phone or stop talking when necessary to concentrate on the course, they'd most likely have passed just fine. That test was one of the few times that I was disappointed in a Mythbusters experiment for not being thorough enough.
It's been several months since I researched things on this, but in the official reports, the girl killed herself after an argument with her mother over her excessive internet use. The media and people crying for Lori Drew's blood ignore this (well, many of the people online probably never knew about it) when it shows that if anyone besides the girl is to blame, it was her PARENTS. Lori Drew may have hurt someone's feelings (not a crime yet), but to claim that she had anything to do with the girl killing herself is bullshit. Lori Drew is a scapegoat that the parents pushed the blame onto.
Oh, with the women I know they're well aware that they exist, they just rarely ever turn to the HD channels and say they can't tell a difference. How this is possible when the text on news shows is blurry and the anchorman's face looks like you zoomed in with MS paint because the pixelation is so bad, I have no idea.
"My gf routinely has the SD, rather than HD, version of various TV channels on because evidently from her point of view there is no discernable difference."
Every time I see someone using an HD tv with HD channels available but still watching SD, it's always a woman. I guess this completely disproves the old claim that women pay more attention to detail then men!
"Will he magically fix the economy? If so, how long? What exactly is he going to do?"
See, that's the only small upside to him getting elected. His economic policy is SO bad that he's going to take this bad economy and make it worse. I say that most of the white people who thought he actually was going to make things better go "wtf?!" and don't vote to re-elect him.
Would McCain be a great president? Probably not, he'd most likely be ok. His policies are decent overall but the man himself is an ass. However, we just signed the death sentence of the American Dream here. Goodbye being rewarded for your work!
I said he's probably NOT a terrorist agent. However, he knows as well as everyone else that a Muslim has less chance of becoming president of the US than a hobo who never made it past the 3rd grade. Perfect reason for friends and family to lie, so that he can get elected. Politicians lie all the time to get elected.
My main reason for not voting for him is that he's a socialist / communist who'll do irreparable damage to our country. I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to live in the Soviet States of America.
The Muslim part is just a matter of "seriously, how can you trust this guy?" on the side. And "Fooling his own grandparents at the age of 7" -- who says they were fooled? Do you really think that they couldn't be lying too? And yes, it does say in the Qu'ran that it's ok to lie if it furthers the cause of Islam . Is he a terrorist plant? I doubt it. COULD he be? Yes.
If you go through it, your link shows the exact same transcript of the relevant portion of the interview as mine did. The difference? Your source makes assumptions about why Obama said what he said, because of course the Messiah could never, ever lie, make a mistake, or mislead anyone at any time, ever. That would be blasphemy. Instead, it must have just been that the evil white interviewer was forcing words into his mouth.
I get why some people would think that it was a misunderstanding and not a slip, but if it wasn't a slip, he would have said something along the lines of "John McCain has never alleged that I was / am a Muslim" not "has not talked about my Muslim faith".
Studies have shown time and time again that throwing money at public education doesn't produce better students if the kids don't want to learn / have parents who will make them do the work. We've also seen through the last century how stealing money from people who work and giving it to people who are too lazy to work / won't put out the effort required to get a well paying job ends up dragging everyone down. If Obama really cared about helping poor people he wouldn't be saying "I'm going to steal money from the evil white people and give it to you!" he'd say "The only person who can really help you is yourself. You have to decide that you REALLY want a better life and work for it. Sure, you may need help from friends / a church / a charity to get you started, but the vast majority of it is purely on you" and point to countless examples of people who had a bad life, were born into poverty, and then chose to make something of themselves instead of just staying where they were because it required less effort.
Obama will only drag the country as a whole down and help keep the poor poor (which has long been a tactic of the Democrats since then they can always blame the evil white Republicans and keep getting the same people to vote for them). I can't wait to laugh when Obama gets elected and the stock market doesn't magically change, people don't magically stop doing crack and start going to school, etc. Maybe that's the wake up call this country needs though, for everyone to put their blind faith into their messiah and when he fails to bring about the utopia they believe he will, they will realize that socialism is NOT going to make anything better. -- only hard work (and being able to receive the benefits if your hard work) can make things better.
...is the fact that in an interview Obama made a reference to his "muslim faith" then said "oh, that was a slip, I meant to say christian faith". I've known many people who converted from one religion to another (including Muslims who became Christians) and have never before heard someone "slip" like that. It's like someone "accidentally" saying "I'm a republican.......oh that was a slip......I mean, I'm a democrat".
Would you care to provide a source for this since you're the first person ever that I've heard with this "the government did it" idea.
I'm very much against the government getting involved -- unless it's a necessary thing. Yes, 99.99% of the government is it screwing things up, but there is that occasional.01% of the time where it's actually necessary for them to get involved.
The cause of the Great Depression was people panicking and selling all their stocks. Same thing exists today with people panicking (due in great part to the media screaming "the sky is falling" for the last two years) and selling stocks. By buying these lousy mortgages the government can attempt to get people to stop panicking and help things rebound and prevent things from totally falling apart. Will it work? Only time will tell.
If they did nothing and the economy completely crumbled leading to the Great Depression Part 2, you'd sure as hell feel it when you lost your job.
I'd also like to point out that "free health care" is NOT free, it's paid for by taxes. The lie of "free" health care is easy enough for anyone who passed the 6th grade to realize, so why are so many American dumb enough to think that the government magically finds money and that the hundreds of billions or even trillions a year needed for "free" health care won't be paid for with tax dollars?
Since I haven't read anything but people condemning this kid for slander / libel, I feel I should raise the obvious question -- what proof is there that the principal DOESN'T hit on students? Also, IANAL, but I would assume that something can't be considered slander / libel if there's no reason for it to be taken seriously -- looking at all the insults in there would make it seem obvious that this is probably a kid who's just pissed off about something I don't know a single person who would read that and take it seriously.
I could be wrong, but since I hadn't seen anyone mention these things yet, I figured someone should bring it up.
Slashdot Mirror
Not true. Synaptic / Yum make getting and installing software a snap -- all you have to do is say "Hey, here's something many versions of linux have built in -- a way to get software downloaded and installed with no hassle at all", show installing something (pick something small so there's no huge download / install time for the viewer to wait) and you're done. You don't need to show them all the different GUI's or any other programs because most people not already using linux aren't going to CARE about those things. However, being able to get FREE software and install it without having to click through EULA's or "yes/no" boxes WILL be of interest to many people.
What traumatic things, may I ask? I've been on the internet with no restrictions since I was fairly young and most people first heard of the internet -- and the only "traumatic" thing I can think of that I've seen is tubgirl, and all that does is make you go "wow, that's nasty" and then you close the window and forget about it.
I told a friend about the Antikythera mechanism a few years back when I first heard about it on the History Channel. His response? "Impossible. People hadn't evolved enough back then to have built something like that".
Just curious since this is a "true story" of yours (not saying it's not), but what state did it happen in? 32 states in the US have the age of consent at 16, and another 7 have it at 17. Odds are for most people that you live in a state where they don't have to be 18 to be legal. Depending on what state your friend lived in, he could sue the Sheriff.
Agreed, especially when it comes to games (and supporting older games). I spent a whole day tracking down drivers for each part in my new laptop so that I could install XP and ditch Vista due to Vista's crap performance with games. Other than that it was alright, nothing HORRIBLE, but nothing stellar either. The last straw for me though was when I installed Diablo 2 and once you log onto battle.net with it the game drops to about 2 frames per second. That was when Vista went bye-bye.
Sorry, but while irritating, not maintaining a constant speed (or even getting up to the speed limit) isn't dangerous driving. Do I hate it when some idiot's on the phone and is doing 35 in a 55 zone? Sure. Do I want to hit him? You bet. Is he driving dangerously? Nope.
Driving fast is not in itself very dangerous (until you get to ridiculous speeds, such as the top speed of a Bugatti Veyron and have extremely short reaction times). What IS dangerous is tailgating, driving faster than your car is capable, driving faster than road conditions permit, or driving faster than YOU are capable of.
There's a reason why in Germany they focus more on tickets for tailgating than tickets for speeding on the Autobahn (and yes the speeding only applies to the restricted sections). Two cars driven by halfway competent people in capable cars at 100 mph aren't any more likely to crash than if they were doing 65 mph. However, if the one car is driving a foot behind the other car like many morons do, then it IS dangerous because there's no time to hit the brakes if the first car needs to slow down.
The problem isn't speed, it's people not leaving a safe distance to allow for stopping in an emergency.
Not trying to be mean, but if you can't even have the radio on while driving or you crash, you shouldn't be driving then. Same goes for CdBee who also replied to you. If you're that easily distracted, you're no safer behind the wheel than a person with narcolepsy.
The problem with these studies is that they always assume that people (and when doing tests such as Mythbusters did prevent the test subject from) can not / will not say "hold on" and put the phone down when they need to concentrate or if it's an emergency just drop the phone.
My car is a manual and I rarely talk on the phone when I'm not on the highway (for obvious reasons). On the rare occasions that I am on it while not cruising at a constant speed, if I need to make a sharp enough turn that I need both hands or shift gears I simply say "hang on a sec", drop the phone in my lap, do what I need to do, and when I'm free to use the phone again I do so.
You cite the Mythbusters test, yet if the drivers had been allowed to drop the phone or stop talking when necessary to concentrate on the course, they'd most likely have passed just fine. That test was one of the few times that I was disappointed in a Mythbusters experiment for not being thorough enough.
It's been several months since I researched things on this, but in the official reports, the girl killed herself after an argument with her mother over her excessive internet use. The media and people crying for Lori Drew's blood ignore this (well, many of the people online probably never knew about it) when it shows that if anyone besides the girl is to blame, it was her PARENTS. Lori Drew may have hurt someone's feelings (not a crime yet), but to claim that she had anything to do with the girl killing herself is bullshit. Lori Drew is a scapegoat that the parents pushed the blame onto.
Oh, with the women I know they're well aware that they exist, they just rarely ever turn to the HD channels and say they can't tell a difference. How this is possible when the text on news shows is blurry and the anchorman's face looks like you zoomed in with MS paint because the pixelation is so bad, I have no idea.
"My gf routinely has the SD, rather than HD, version of various TV channels on because evidently from her point of view there is no discernable difference."
Every time I see someone using an HD tv with HD channels available but still watching SD, it's always a woman. I guess this completely disproves the old claim that women pay more attention to detail then men!
"Will he magically fix the economy? If so, how long? What exactly is he going to do?"
See, that's the only small upside to him getting elected. His economic policy is SO bad that he's going to take this bad economy and make it worse. I say that most of the white people who thought he actually was going to make things better go "wtf?!" and don't vote to re-elect him.
Would McCain be a great president? Probably not, he'd most likely be ok. His policies are decent overall but the man himself is an ass. However, we just signed the death sentence of the American Dream here. Goodbye being rewarded for your work!
Come on mods, the parent was pretty funny. First thing to make me laugh all day.
I said he's probably NOT a terrorist agent. However, he knows as well as everyone else that a Muslim has less chance of becoming president of the US than a hobo who never made it past the 3rd grade. Perfect reason for friends and family to lie, so that he can get elected. Politicians lie all the time to get elected.
My main reason for not voting for him is that he's a socialist / communist who'll do irreparable damage to our country. I don't know about you, but I sure don't want to live in the Soviet States of America.
The Muslim part is just a matter of "seriously, how can you trust this guy?" on the side. And "Fooling his own grandparents at the age of 7" -- who says they were fooled? Do you really think that they couldn't be lying too? And yes, it does say in the Qu'ran that it's ok to lie if it furthers the cause of Islam . Is he a terrorist plant? I doubt it. COULD he be? Yes.
If you go through it, your link shows the exact same transcript of the relevant portion of the interview as mine did. The difference? Your source makes assumptions about why Obama said what he said, because of course the Messiah could never, ever lie, make a mistake, or mislead anyone at any time, ever. That would be blasphemy. Instead, it must have just been that the evil white interviewer was forcing words into his mouth.
I get why some people would think that it was a misunderstanding and not a slip, but if it wasn't a slip, he would have said something along the lines of "John McCain has never alleged that I was / am a Muslim" not "has not talked about my Muslim faith".
Have you learned nothing from Heroes? Peter will ALWAYS save the day!
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/?pageId=74635 It was a televised interview on ABC.
Studies have shown time and time again that throwing money at public education doesn't produce better students if the kids don't want to learn / have parents who will make them do the work. We've also seen through the last century how stealing money from people who work and giving it to people who are too lazy to work / won't put out the effort required to get a well paying job ends up dragging everyone down. If Obama really cared about helping poor people he wouldn't be saying "I'm going to steal money from the evil white people and give it to you!" he'd say "The only person who can really help you is yourself. You have to decide that you REALLY want a better life and work for it. Sure, you may need help from friends / a church / a charity to get you started, but the vast majority of it is purely on you" and point to countless examples of people who had a bad life, were born into poverty, and then chose to make something of themselves instead of just staying where they were because it required less effort.
Obama will only drag the country as a whole down and help keep the poor poor (which has long been a tactic of the Democrats since then they can always blame the evil white Republicans and keep getting the same people to vote for them). I can't wait to laugh when Obama gets elected and the stock market doesn't magically change, people don't magically stop doing crack and start going to school, etc. Maybe that's the wake up call this country needs though, for everyone to put their blind faith into their messiah and when he fails to bring about the utopia they believe he will, they will realize that socialism is NOT going to make anything better. -- only hard work (and being able to receive the benefits if your hard work) can make things better.
...is the fact that in an interview Obama made a reference to his "muslim faith" then said "oh, that was a slip, I meant to say christian faith". I've known many people who converted from one religion to another (including Muslims who became Christians) and have never before heard someone "slip" like that. It's like someone "accidentally" saying "I'm a republican.......oh that was a slip......I mean, I'm a democrat".
Would you care to provide a source for this since you're the first person ever that I've heard with this "the government did it" idea.
I'm very much against the government getting involved -- unless it's a necessary thing. Yes, 99.99% of the government is it screwing things up, but there is that occasional .01% of the time where it's actually necessary for them to get involved.
The cause of the Great Depression was people panicking and selling all their stocks. Same thing exists today with people panicking (due in great part to the media screaming "the sky is falling" for the last two years) and selling stocks. By buying these lousy mortgages the government can attempt to get people to stop panicking and help things rebound and prevent things from totally falling apart. Will it work? Only time will tell.
If they did nothing and the economy completely crumbled leading to the Great Depression Part 2, you'd sure as hell feel it when you lost your job.
I'd also like to point out that "free health care" is NOT free, it's paid for by taxes. The lie of "free" health care is easy enough for anyone who passed the 6th grade to realize, so why are so many American dumb enough to think that the government magically finds money and that the hundreds of billions or even trillions a year needed for "free" health care won't be paid for with tax dollars?
Since I haven't read anything but people condemning this kid for slander / libel, I feel I should raise the obvious question -- what proof is there that the principal DOESN'T hit on students? Also, IANAL, but I would assume that something can't be considered slander / libel if there's no reason for it to be taken seriously -- looking at all the insults in there would make it seem obvious that this is probably a kid who's just pissed off about something I don't know a single person who would read that and take it seriously.
I could be wrong, but since I hadn't seen anyone mention these things yet, I figured someone should bring it up.