We do that in the Centeral time zone. Because everything is centered around the East coast for a lot of business. This exasperbates the getting up in the dark problem, since we have to be at work at local 0700 solar time. So, it's not a complete solution. And to be honest, 7-3 sucks as work hours, so please stop encouraging coasties to move to our hours.
Backbone routers don't know what http is, or even TCP. Well, at least, not as far as routing is concerned. The simply move packets from one network segment to another. IP was designed as a specifically stupid protocol. The infrastructure neither knows, nor cares what any packet it is moving contains, it simply reproduces it on the appropriate network segment, or drops it, if it is unable to reproduce it in the proper amount of time.
I don't know. I kinda like the idea of an armed insurgency in the US. Please don't turn the flamage on juts yet though. The reason I like it is because the insurgency wouldn't necisarilly be against the US government. Remeber that for a good portion of US history, that we weren't the biggest billy baddass on the block. And the historical armed insurgencies in the US have included some of the bloodiest and longest in world history. Specifically the US Civil War, and the War of Independance. Now, since the War of Independance was actually a British Insurgency, on soil that successfully broke away, I'm not sure if it is proper to count it, but in one case insurgency worked, and in another, not so much. In addition we do have other periodic insurgencies, though we don't call them that, and they do tend to be small. The Shiskey Rebellion, Bleeding Kansas, the Cattle and Sheep wars of the American southwest, The Utah rebellion, the Branch Daviidian Compound, and others. So, while you find it laughable, it is something that is a reality. And let's not even get started on Gang Wars. I'd say that those could very well count as insurgencies as well. Just because the insurgents don't have any specific goals in mind doesn't change the way things are. But the point I was meaning to make, is that if the US is invaded, and armed populace will make things hell for the invaders. And we have one of the most highly armed populaces in the world.
Seperately, there are many vetrens in the US, and they could serve as Cadre for insurgent forces. If you want to know how effective veterans can be as terrorists, take a look at the Okalhoma City bombing. McVeigh could have managed to do a lot more damage, if he were wanting to wage a sustained, and systematic attack on someone. Because his goal was to attack his own government, it reduced his ability to win the people over, and to fade away after the attack. In an insurgency, someone of comprable training and skill could have killed many, many more people, in a militarily significant way.
If you can't make a $35 (US) purchase out of petty cash, then you should go talk to your boss, about what is a reasonable business expenditure to make without talking to higher management. If they are going to pay you enough to be a webmaster, or whatever, they should give you enough purse power to do your job.
Yes, it does. The well regulated militia clause is an independent clause. The meaning of the amendment would not be changed by its removal. The clause is a preamble, explaining the reasoning behind the amendment, not restricting it. But that's a common mistake.
Wal-Mart doesn't do loss leaders. They simply use their huge economic might to force producers to accept whatever they are willing to pay for their goods, or they won't buy them. It's predatory, it's not nice, and dealing with Wal-Mart is a pain in the ass, but the contract is so big, a lot of producers go with it anyway. If you don't, your goods aren't on Wal-Mart's shelves.
That is only not an excuse if the action is against the rules of warfare. If a military superior gives a soldier an order, unless that order is illegal, under the laws of the military the soldier is in, or the international rules of warfare his country has agreed to, the soldier has a responsibility to follow those orders. Failure to do so can have severe consequences, up to and including execution for mutiny. So, if it's only a moral issue, then it is the job of the soldier to shut up and soldier.
Most card games are fair. And if you don't know what the probablities are of what you can get with your hand and you're playing poker, you're a fucking idiot, and deserve to lose your money. Also, in every poker game I've played, the deck is shuffled after each hand, but if it isn't, then you might have a point. If it is, the probabilites are there, knowing the game isn't cheating.
As far as burlary goes, two words. Castle Doctorine. If someone breaks into your home, you can kill them, it is considered Justifiable Homicide. If they kill you first, then they have commited murder, and unless you live in a state where bleeding hearts rule, they are eligable for the death penalty. (murder in the commission of another felony). But like I said, I don't agree with the sex offender registry because there are way to many people who did not commit sufficently heinous crimes to warrant being on such a list. And though the supreme court disagrees with me, those whos crimes are that heinous, should be executed.
To be honest, my biggest problem with the sex offender registries are what counts as a sex-crime. I don't think that Indecent Exposure, Public Urination, or several other "sex crimes" should be included. I'm also not sure about statutory rape. While, yes it is a sex crime, it is something that someone under the age of consent can be conviced of for having sex with someone their own age. I also support the death penalty for rape (real rape, not statutory).
So we don't call it "genocide" we call it "pacification" same methods, different name. I'm still not seeing a real problem. And you're right, we don't really want to kill all the barbarians, we just want them to know we CAN, then they will get in line, like good little barbs, and we can handle them in the proper manner, as laborers. Once in a while we might have rebellions, but once they get used to the oppression, as long as we don't give them more freedom, we should be fine. (most rebellions of an underclass against an overclass happen when the underclass starts getting more rights and freedom, not when they are so oppressed all they can do is survive)
Um, all the first world countries have used genocide as official foreign policy. It's call colonialism. part of colonizing a place is getting rid of those inconvenient natives. While they might not call it genocide, and they may not even think of it, that's still what it is. So they don't do it any more, that's not my point. My point is that nobody has ever actually given a damn about the barbarians, and nobody ever will. It's dirty, it's ugly, but it's the way things are. And yes, there could be some argument about Iraq as barbarians, but that is largely academic. They aren't part of the EU or the former Warsaw Pact or NATO, so by and large, they are just a nice place to get resources to the "first world". Afghanistan has no redeeming economic value, and very few would argue that the people there are anything but barbarians.
That does not change the fact that there has never been significant trouble over genocide on an international level. Yes it's used to stir up support for wars that the powers that be want to get involved in anyway, but it is never the primary reason for going to war. Nations go to war out of self interest. Nobody has gotten seriously involved in any of the genocidal conflicts in Africa, nobody stopped the near extermination of the Native Americans by their white conquerers, and nobody ever will. That's my point. Nobody cares, unless it makes them look good to care in a manner that exceeds the risk. And even then they only care if there are other things that make them care. If Kuwait didn't have oil, nobody would have cared about Iraq invading them. If Iraq didn't have oil, nobody would care about the US invading them. Afghanistan was a theocratic totalitarian regeime for decades, and until it hit us in the back yard, we didn't care. Nations take care of themselves first, and everything else later. And WMD are hardly a requirement for genocide. Actually the best weapon for genocide is a powerful professional army. So, once again, not only who is going to stop us, but who is going to CARE.
The same right every invader in history has ever had. We're stronger. That's the only reason we need, and the only reason we've ever needed. We dress up things to make us look good, but the entire history of the US is us expanding because we are stronger than our enemies. Or we are willing to take more casualties than our enemies, or we are willing to inflict more casualties than our enemies, or we can simply outlast our enemies economically. Take a look at the American Revolution. We were willing to die and die and die, until the brits stoped sending more troops over here to die with us. Then there was the Tripolii action. We sent some marines to fuck up pirates out of spite. Then there was the War of 1812. We wanted to bump out street cred with Europe, so while the Brits were busy with France we picked another war with them, and took quite a bit on the chin. Then there was Indian Fighting through all of this, us taking land from barbarians (in the original sense of the word) because we wanted it, and they weren't organised enough to stop us. Then we had the Mexican American war, where we took on an organised military, that had neither the funding nor training to defeat us. Then several of our states decided to cesede from the Union, and we fought the War of Northern Aggression, to get them back, after that we picked a war with Spain, to get international Imperialism underway. Then we let the Brits and French bleed out the Germans, and got involved at the last minute, TWICE. After that we had the Cold War with Russia and Red China, with almost all conflicts in the 20th century being part of that, save for Grenada, and the Persian Gulf. So, if the US poking it's nose where it doesn't belong shocks you, what should really shock you is what a piss poor job we've done of it since 1950, instead of that we have seemed to do nothing but shove our reproductive organs into a meat grinder over and over again. Oh, and before anyone flames me for being anti-war, I think this is a GOOD and HEALTHY thing for a powerful nation to do.
It's applied to the forebrain, not the brainstem, the critter is braindead, but its body is alive for the throat slitting. It's actually part of slaughter law, at least in the US.
Most likely a steer (castrated bull), that was knocked senseless before having it's throat slit. (they are still alive for that part. Hearts are very good pumps) Cows get slaughtered at a much later age, and are fairly tough.
Prayer is the wrong ritual for separating hydrogen from oxygen in water. He correct ritual is electrolysis. How can you succeed if you don't use the right ritual? God requires the energy from a DC power source be sacrificed to refine the water into its constituent parts. Don't you know anything? Besides, god helps those who help themselves.
I'm sorry that you have a problem with this. You should have known that what you were doing was going to be a specific attempt to attract FPS Doug and the like. I'm sorry, but I can't say that I feel particularly much sorrow for your moral quandary. You knew the score going in. It really just drives me nuts when people complain about things like this. If you were working for a company that then took the contract, then I could understand the problem, but if you're working for the Navy, then, you know that your work is about killing people. And one of the most important things the military does to kill people, is recruit the people to do the actual killing.
Lots, and lots die of childbirth if they don't get enough Vitamin D. Ever heard of rickets? It's a debilitating bone condition caused by a lack of Vitamin D. It's not quite as severe and immediate as scurvy, but it's pretty nasty. The cancer issue is a lesser evolutionary force.
Humans are opportunistic scavengers. We are capable of chasing down the weak and ill animals, we have a greater natural stamina than wolves, horses, zebras, bison, deer, oxen, and many other animals. Our teeth have grown smaller because we cook our food, however humans are quite capable of killing many animals with our bare hands. We also have been tool users for millions of years, and our bodies have adapted to this as well. Indeed the most violent and sadistic tribes enjoyed killing animals. And they got significantly better nutrition than those that do not. The nearest related species to humans also is an opportunistic omnivore, though they do eat much more plant matter. Chimps hunt and kill birds, smaller primates, and even members of other chimp troops. They readily eat termites, and even make tools to get them. So, anyone who says that humans are herbivores is woefully lacking in their understanding of comparative biology, and usually blinded to the truth by dogmas of certain religions that believe that harming animals harms the soul. If you look at the way that food is prepared, you'll even notice that humans prefer their meat to be slightly decayed, such as aged beef. Also cooking accelerates non-biotic breakdown of the muscle tissues, making them easier to digest for fat and protein It also kills the very bacteria that we like to partially predigest our food for us. As to the constipation angle, we are omnivores. We do eat vegetable matter as well as animal matter, which cancels this out. And many of the organisms that live in rotting meat (which as I've stated, is what is preferred by humans) can cause dysentery, so it's not as big of a deal as you'd think. Anyway, I'm done with my rant, and I've got karma to burn. Respond or not. I don't really care.
Well, It was pissing me off. And I had data that I couldn't lose yet that I need to back up. I'm getting tired of some of Red Hat's crap with Fedora. I should be able to run a distro for more than a year. So I guess I'll upgrade to a different Distro in the future. It's still working though. And I have those backups to make, as I get around to them.
Slashdot Mirror
We do that in the Centeral time zone. Because everything is centered around the East coast for a lot of business. This exasperbates the getting up in the dark problem, since we have to be at work at local 0700 solar time. So, it's not a complete solution. And to be honest, 7-3 sucks as work hours, so please stop encouraging coasties to move to our hours.
Backbone routers don't know what http is, or even TCP. Well, at least, not as far as routing is concerned. The simply move packets from one network segment to another. IP was designed as a specifically stupid protocol. The infrastructure neither knows, nor cares what any packet it is moving contains, it simply reproduces it on the appropriate network segment, or drops it, if it is unable to reproduce it in the proper amount of time.
Seperately, there are many vetrens in the US, and they could serve as Cadre for insurgent forces. If you want to know how effective veterans can be as terrorists, take a look at the Okalhoma City bombing. McVeigh could have managed to do a lot more damage, if he were wanting to wage a sustained, and systematic attack on someone. Because his goal was to attack his own government, it reduced his ability to win the people over, and to fade away after the attack. In an insurgency, someone of comprable training and skill could have killed many, many more people, in a militarily significant way.
If you can't make a $35 (US) purchase out of petty cash, then you should go talk to your boss, about what is a reasonable business expenditure to make without talking to higher management. If they are going to pay you enough to be a webmaster, or whatever, they should give you enough purse power to do your job.
Yes, it does. The well regulated militia clause is an independent clause. The meaning of the amendment would not be changed by its removal. The clause is a preamble, explaining the reasoning behind the amendment, not restricting it. But that's a common mistake.
Wal-Mart doesn't do loss leaders. They simply use their huge economic might to force producers to accept whatever they are willing to pay for their goods, or they won't buy them. It's predatory, it's not nice, and dealing with Wal-Mart is a pain in the ass, but the contract is so big, a lot of producers go with it anyway. If you don't, your goods aren't on Wal-Mart's shelves.
That is only not an excuse if the action is against the rules of warfare. If a military superior gives a soldier an order, unless that order is illegal, under the laws of the military the soldier is in, or the international rules of warfare his country has agreed to, the soldier has a responsibility to follow those orders. Failure to do so can have severe consequences, up to and including execution for mutiny. So, if it's only a moral issue, then it is the job of the soldier to shut up and soldier.
Most card games are fair. And if you don't know what the probablities are of what you can get with your hand and you're playing poker, you're a fucking idiot, and deserve to lose your money. Also, in every poker game I've played, the deck is shuffled after each hand, but if it isn't, then you might have a point. If it is, the probabilites are there, knowing the game isn't cheating.
As far as burlary goes, two words. Castle Doctorine. If someone breaks into your home, you can kill them, it is considered Justifiable Homicide. If they kill you first, then they have commited murder, and unless you live in a state where bleeding hearts rule, they are eligable for the death penalty. (murder in the commission of another felony). But like I said, I don't agree with the sex offender registry because there are way to many people who did not commit sufficently heinous crimes to warrant being on such a list. And though the supreme court disagrees with me, those whos crimes are that heinous, should be executed.
To be honest, my biggest problem with the sex offender registries are what counts as a sex-crime. I don't think that Indecent Exposure, Public Urination, or several other "sex crimes" should be included. I'm also not sure about statutory rape. While, yes it is a sex crime, it is something that someone under the age of consent can be conviced of for having sex with someone their own age. I also support the death penalty for rape (real rape, not statutory).
So we don't call it "genocide" we call it "pacification" same methods, different name. I'm still not seeing a real problem. And you're right, we don't really want to kill all the barbarians, we just want them to know we CAN, then they will get in line, like good little barbs, and we can handle them in the proper manner, as laborers. Once in a while we might have rebellions, but once they get used to the oppression, as long as we don't give them more freedom, we should be fine. (most rebellions of an underclass against an overclass happen when the underclass starts getting more rights and freedom, not when they are so oppressed all they can do is survive)
Um, all the first world countries have used genocide as official foreign policy. It's call colonialism. part of colonizing a place is getting rid of those inconvenient natives. While they might not call it genocide, and they may not even think of it, that's still what it is. So they don't do it any more, that's not my point. My point is that nobody has ever actually given a damn about the barbarians, and nobody ever will. It's dirty, it's ugly, but it's the way things are. And yes, there could be some argument about Iraq as barbarians, but that is largely academic. They aren't part of the EU or the former Warsaw Pact or NATO, so by and large, they are just a nice place to get resources to the "first world". Afghanistan has no redeeming economic value, and very few would argue that the people there are anything but barbarians.
While my sig is from Nietzsche, not all of my opinions are. But thank you for getting the quote.
That does not change the fact that there has never been significant trouble over genocide on an international level. Yes it's used to stir up support for wars that the powers that be want to get involved in anyway, but it is never the primary reason for going to war. Nations go to war out of self interest. Nobody has gotten seriously involved in any of the genocidal conflicts in Africa, nobody stopped the near extermination of the Native Americans by their white conquerers, and nobody ever will. That's my point. Nobody cares, unless it makes them look good to care in a manner that exceeds the risk. And even then they only care if there are other things that make them care. If Kuwait didn't have oil, nobody would have cared about Iraq invading them. If Iraq didn't have oil, nobody would care about the US invading them. Afghanistan was a theocratic totalitarian regeime for decades, and until it hit us in the back yard, we didn't care. Nations take care of themselves first, and everything else later. And WMD are hardly a requirement for genocide. Actually the best weapon for genocide is a powerful professional army. So, once again, not only who is going to stop us, but who is going to CARE.
Read your history, since when have they not. The only unforgiveable sin in international politics is weakness.
The same right every invader in history has ever had. We're stronger. That's the only reason we need, and the only reason we've ever needed. We dress up things to make us look good, but the entire history of the US is us expanding because we are stronger than our enemies. Or we are willing to take more casualties than our enemies, or we are willing to inflict more casualties than our enemies, or we can simply outlast our enemies economically. Take a look at the American Revolution. We were willing to die and die and die, until the brits stoped sending more troops over here to die with us. Then there was the Tripolii action. We sent some marines to fuck up pirates out of spite. Then there was the War of 1812. We wanted to bump out street cred with Europe, so while the Brits were busy with France we picked another war with them, and took quite a bit on the chin. Then there was Indian Fighting through all of this, us taking land from barbarians (in the original sense of the word) because we wanted it, and they weren't organised enough to stop us. Then we had the Mexican American war, where we took on an organised military, that had neither the funding nor training to defeat us. Then several of our states decided to cesede from the Union, and we fought the War of Northern Aggression, to get them back, after that we picked a war with Spain, to get international Imperialism underway. Then we let the Brits and French bleed out the Germans, and got involved at the last minute, TWICE. After that we had the Cold War with Russia and Red China, with almost all conflicts in the 20th century being part of that, save for Grenada, and the Persian Gulf. So, if the US poking it's nose where it doesn't belong shocks you, what should really shock you is what a piss poor job we've done of it since 1950, instead of that we have seemed to do nothing but shove our reproductive organs into a meat grinder over and over again. Oh, and before anyone flames me for being anti-war, I think this is a GOOD and HEALTHY thing for a powerful nation to do.
It's applied to the forebrain, not the brainstem, the critter is braindead, but its body is alive for the throat slitting. It's actually part of slaughter law, at least in the US.
Most likely a steer (castrated bull), that was knocked senseless before having it's throat slit. (they are still alive for that part. Hearts are very good pumps) Cows get slaughtered at a much later age, and are fairly tough.
Prayer is the wrong ritual for separating hydrogen from oxygen in water. He correct ritual is electrolysis. How can you succeed if you don't use the right ritual? God requires the energy from a DC power source be sacrificed to refine the water into its constituent parts. Don't you know anything? Besides, god helps those who help themselves.
Um, I think that static casting to an int always rounds down. But I'd have to check to make sure. Maybe you should do 2.6 instead of 2.6?
I'm sorry that you have a problem with this. You should have known that what you were doing was going to be a specific attempt to attract FPS Doug and the like. I'm sorry, but I can't say that I feel particularly much sorrow for your moral quandary. You knew the score going in. It really just drives me nuts when people complain about things like this. If you were working for a company that then took the contract, then I could understand the problem, but if you're working for the Navy, then, you know that your work is about killing people. And one of the most important things the military does to kill people, is recruit the people to do the actual killing.
Lots, and lots die of childbirth if they don't get enough Vitamin D. Ever heard of rickets? It's a debilitating bone condition caused by a lack of Vitamin D. It's not quite as severe and immediate as scurvy, but it's pretty nasty. The cancer issue is a lesser evolutionary force.
Humans are opportunistic scavengers. We are capable of chasing down the weak and ill animals, we have a greater natural stamina than wolves, horses, zebras, bison, deer, oxen, and many other animals. Our teeth have grown smaller because we cook our food, however humans are quite capable of killing many animals with our bare hands. We also have been tool users for millions of years, and our bodies have adapted to this as well. Indeed the most violent and sadistic tribes enjoyed killing animals. And they got significantly better nutrition than those that do not. The nearest related species to humans also is an opportunistic omnivore, though they do eat much more plant matter. Chimps hunt and kill birds, smaller primates, and even members of other chimp troops. They readily eat termites, and even make tools to get them. So, anyone who says that humans are herbivores is woefully lacking in their understanding of comparative biology, and usually blinded to the truth by dogmas of certain religions that believe that harming animals harms the soul. If you look at the way that food is prepared, you'll even notice that humans prefer their meat to be slightly decayed, such as aged beef. Also cooking accelerates non-biotic breakdown of the muscle tissues, making them easier to digest for fat and protein It also kills the very bacteria that we like to partially predigest our food for us. As to the constipation angle, we are omnivores. We do eat vegetable matter as well as animal matter, which cancels this out. And many of the organisms that live in rotting meat (which as I've stated, is what is preferred by humans) can cause dysentery, so it's not as big of a deal as you'd think. Anyway, I'm done with my rant, and I've got karma to burn. Respond or not. I don't really care.
Yeah, but you can't upgrade from 4 to 6 without intermediary. And my YUM configuration is a little hozed.
Well, It was pissing me off. And I had data that I couldn't lose yet that I need to back up. I'm getting tired of some of Red Hat's crap with Fedora. I should be able to run a distro for more than a year. So I guess I'll upgrade to a different Distro in the future. It's still working though. And I have those backups to make, as I get around to them.