This has zilch to do with enforcement because the proposal contains no technical method of enforcement. Nothing is encrypted and nothing is protected in any way. The 'system' is basically, AP tags news items and you are on your honor to respect those tags. That's it.
Riiiight. Nothing to prove, you keep telling yourself that, champ. Nothing you CAN prove, I'll buy that, but you have not even attempted to show your reasoning, or explained your philosophy, so your passive aggressive whining just falls flat.
Really, I'm terribly hurt. You sure won that one! Your cogent reasoning, copious examples, and impeccable logic shine through.
Homophobic religious zealots can all go roast in their make believe hells. You don't have an argument, you can't refute me, so you resort to ad hominems. I, on the other hand, HAVE an argument and merely throw in the ad hominems because you are such a douchenozzle.
YAY! I've defeated the evil snaffu in logical combat AND THE CROWD GOES WILD awarding me a +5 for my brilliant repartee, while the challenger slinks off to sulk. Buh bye, smell you later, and all that.
All the rage... in what way? Certainly not as a party drug! Lithium is not what most would call, 'recreational.' I've got a good friend who is seriously manic depressive and he still takes lithium, as well as depakote, lamotrigine, and seroquel. No opiates, just whopping handfuls of heavy duty anti-nuttiness drugs. Yes, that is the technical term for them.
Oh please, grow up and get down off of your princess chair. This is the Internet, you will find 'cussing' here. Get used to it.
Carroline Prejean was an idiot (yes, she was a model and a beauty queen, so that almost goes without saying.) In our modern, enlightened age it is no more acceptable to be prejudiced against gays than it is to be prejudiced against people of color. If you say you hate black people, or think gays shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else, most decent human beings will simply not respect you or your 'opinion.' Again, get used to it. You have a right to free speech. That right comes with responsibilities. If you act or speak like an asshole, expect consequences.
In this case, the consequences were nothing more than people saying what a douchenozzle Prejean is. She was stripped of her crown for completely different reasons, not for her anti-gay comment. Depending on who you listen to, she was stripped of her crown for either a.) posing nude, or b.) refusing to pose nude. I was only bringing up Prejean in response to the previous poster, who seemed to think free speech means the right to yell without being yelled back at.
Any press secretary that has ever openly disagreed with their boss's politics has been fired, so what is your point exactly? I can't even tell where you stand on the issue. In fact, the only tangible thing I got from your post is that you are a precious little princess who's delicate ears can't stand the sound of (GASP!) cussing. Well, fuck you and the whore you rode in on.
I personally take issue with the firing of the public employee due to her Facebook posts. She voiced her personal opinions, unrelated to her job, and not in an official capacity. IANAL but as a simple citizen who believes in America and in free speech, I think she should sue the city. I am not going to even bring up the issue of whether she would have been fired if she had been on the political correct pro-administration side. The rise of the thought police (witnes what happened to that CA model that dared to speak her mind about gay marriage) is a scary prospect - irrespective of your ideology.
Unrelated to her job? Bullshit, she was a press secretary. Their job is to engage in public relations for their boss. Publishing an opinion counter to your boss's position is simply not allowed under any circumstances. Imagine if Tony Snow had posted on his Facebook page that he thought John McCain was a loon, how long do you think he would have lasted? Boo hoo for this stupid woman. By her actions she showed her boss that she can not be trusted. How is he to know that she will not let her personal opinions slip into his official press releases? Anyone doing what she did would be fired, on any side of the political spectrum. Hell, if she'd said the same thing about some Republican, she would have been fired. You don't get to have personal opinions about politics when you are a press secretary, if you don't like that, get a different job. Spouting out grade school level insults simply proves that she does not have what it takes to be a press secretary.
Guess what? Words have consequences. That CA model was an idiot, she deserved what she got. If you spout out idiotic rants in public, people may not want to do business with you, go figure. Selfish assholes like you think free speech means you get to say whatever you want, and nobody is allowed to take offense. That's not how things work in the real world, champ. If you talk like an asshole, people will assume you are an asshole, and most people don't want to have much to do with assholes.
That's what I get for not quoting the post I was replying to. Commodore64_love suggested sticking one's head in a microwave to prove that EM waves effect living tissue. I was merely saying the sun would prove the same thing.
Well, yes. Also, sunburn. And skin cancer, blah, blah blah. That's my point, the sun has an effect on organic tissue, and we all know it. However, the sun is not 'low level' by any means, the physical mechanism of damage or allergy is well understood and consistent with known laws of physics.
Based on the snippet of my post that you quoted, I assume you believe your post to be some sort of refutation of my point. Solar Urticaria is NOT caused by low level EM waves, it is caused by high intensity sunlight. Which, as I mentioned, we all know causes damage.
Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid used as a major analgesic. Lithium is an alkali metal used to treat manic depression. Perhaps you were referring to lithium's use to treat certain kinds of headaches? That's the only overlap I can think of.
You, on the other hand, are just plain crazy. Persecution complex much? Coupled with a little narcissism, delusions of grandeur, and paranoia. Take off the tinfoil hat, the ebil gubermint is NOT out to enslave you to pay for welfare mothers on crack. You are NOT an uber-man who is being held down by the lazy parasites of society. Stop blaming the government for everything wrong in your life, chances are the problem has been in you all along. And last but not least, your bitter whining is NOT comedy.
Dude, no one disbelieves that EM waves can have an effect on organic tissue. For a much safer and less sarcastic and condescending proof, GO OUT IN THE SUN. I don't believe that low level EM waves can have such a deleterious effect. I also believe that no scientific study has shown any correlation. Finally, I believe that people claiming to have such a condition respond to fake exposure they know about, and do not respond to real exposure they DON'T know about. In conclusion, while I accept the fact that this may possibly have a slight chance of being real, my working hypothesis is that these people are making shit up because they are crazy hypochondriacs.
AC was being a dick, but you just brought up a completely different point. The first issue you mentioned was lack of potable water. The second issue was destruction of estuaries. These two things are not related. While destruction of estuaries is at least possibly an issue (and I'm quite positive you don't know for sure, you just want to seem smart and concerned about the planet, so you bring up anything you think might possibly be an issue, but you are JUST GUESSING,) the idea that we could get fresh water out of estuaries is NOT, as pointed out so eloquently by our dickish AC friend.
However, this slip is not the most hilarious part of your posts. In order to see what the really, really outrageously funny part is, consider the impact on estuaries of extracting fresh water from them. I'll wait...
I'll use it however I like. If I want to use iTunes with a home built Internet Rice Cooker/MP3 Player, I will. Boo fucking hoo for Apple, where do they get off trying to tell me what I will and will not do with my computer, software, and other hardware? You masochistic, submissive Apple fanboys may get off on being dominated by your Apple-daddy but the rest of us don't swing that way.
Or, you know, maybe the servers don't serve the workstations, but some type of external entity that buys some sort of a service, what do you call them? Customers? Nah, it would have to be that mean old incompetent government, the source of all evil. Why is that the go-to fall guy around here? Am I the only one who has seen the same level of incompetance in the private sector?
It's open source, it's free, it's a complete network management system, and you can import existing asset information as well as populate through network discovery. We use it here at the New Mexico Child Youth and Family Development Department, with 53 offices, 2500 workstations, and 80 servers.
I couldn't have put it better than you just did. We, as a society find it useful to pursue this research, but no company can monetize it without patenting patently un-patentable procedures, so we should socialize the costs of the research. Thankfully, when the free market fails us, we do have other options besides letting some unscrupulous and selfish idiots bend us over a barrel.
Somebody better tell Terry not to wear a red shirt while investigating this. If he ever finds himself wearing a red shirt while away from the ship with only, say, his captain and the first mate, Terry is not coming back.
No, they are only available to the military, thus, the commercial must have been a joke. However, anyone can acquire a million dollars. Therefore, there is some doubt whether this was a joke. I mean, yeah, it is pretty obvious the lawyer was not serious, but is 'pretty obvious' good enough? I guess we'll find out at the trial, if it goes to trial. Whichever way that goes, it is the original lawyer who loses and the law student who wins. The lawyer loses face, while the law student gains a reputation. Who would you hire, a dumbass who makes easily disproven claims, or the guy who goes out of his way to disprove them? To me, that law student looks pretty smart, and I'd hire him over the original lawyer any day (you know, assuming he passes the bar.) I don't think that kid ever expected to get his million dollars. He expected to get a little cheap publicity for his own law career.
How many murders were committed the year of this trial? How many other trials were there? Do you care about all of them? Not in an abstract sense, because anyone can claim to care about something they have just heard about: in a real sense, DO YOU CARE? If your answer is anything but, 'no, I do not care in any concrete sense of the word' then we know you are a liar. You may care about 'justice' and 'people' and other abstract concepts, and these trials represent those concepts, but you do not actually care about the people involved because you do not know them and have never in your life done anything for them. Seriously, have you spared one moment of thought for any of them? How could you have, you don't know anything about those trials, they are, to you, completely abstract. Like this case. Weedhopper was being honest, you are merely pontificating about morality, possibly to make yourself look better. You are a what I like to call a Care Troll. You probably also feign offense when people joke about the recently dead, don't you? Care Trolls don't really care about anything but looking superior to others.
Slashdot Mirror
This has zilch to do with enforcement because the proposal contains no technical method of enforcement. Nothing is encrypted and nothing is protected in any way. The 'system' is basically, AP tags news items and you are on your honor to respect those tags. That's it.
Riiiight. Nothing to prove, you keep telling yourself that, champ. Nothing you CAN prove, I'll buy that, but you have not even attempted to show your reasoning, or explained your philosophy, so your passive aggressive whining just falls flat.
Really, I'm terribly hurt. You sure won that one! Your cogent reasoning, copious examples, and impeccable logic shine through.
Homophobic religious zealots can all go roast in their make believe hells. You don't have an argument, you can't refute me, so you resort to ad hominems. I, on the other hand, HAVE an argument and merely throw in the ad hominems because you are such a douchenozzle.
YAY! I've defeated the evil snaffu in logical combat AND THE CROWD GOES WILD awarding me a +5 for my brilliant repartee, while the challenger slinks off to sulk. Buh bye, smell you later, and all that.
All the rage... in what way? Certainly not as a party drug! Lithium is not what most would call, 'recreational.' I've got a good friend who is seriously manic depressive and he still takes lithium, as well as depakote, lamotrigine, and seroquel. No opiates, just whopping handfuls of heavy duty anti-nuttiness drugs. Yes, that is the technical term for them.
Oh please, grow up and get down off of your princess chair. This is the Internet, you will find 'cussing' here. Get used to it.
Carroline Prejean was an idiot (yes, she was a model and a beauty queen, so that almost goes without saying.) In our modern, enlightened age it is no more acceptable to be prejudiced against gays than it is to be prejudiced against people of color. If you say you hate black people, or think gays shouldn't have the same rights as everyone else, most decent human beings will simply not respect you or your 'opinion.' Again, get used to it. You have a right to free speech. That right comes with responsibilities. If you act or speak like an asshole, expect consequences.
In this case, the consequences were nothing more than people saying what a douchenozzle Prejean is. She was stripped of her crown for completely different reasons, not for her anti-gay comment. Depending on who you listen to, she was stripped of her crown for either a.) posing nude, or b.) refusing to pose nude. I was only bringing up Prejean in response to the previous poster, who seemed to think free speech means the right to yell without being yelled back at.
Any press secretary that has ever openly disagreed with their boss's politics has been fired, so what is your point exactly? I can't even tell where you stand on the issue. In fact, the only tangible thing I got from your post is that you are a precious little princess who's delicate ears can't stand the sound of (GASP!) cussing. Well, fuck you and the whore you rode in on.
I personally take issue with the firing of the public employee due to her Facebook posts. She voiced her personal opinions, unrelated to her job, and not in an official capacity. IANAL but as a simple citizen who believes in America and in free speech, I think she should sue the city. I am not going to even bring up the issue of whether she would have been fired if she had been on the political correct pro-administration side. The rise of the thought police (witnes what happened to that CA model that dared to speak her mind about gay marriage) is a scary prospect - irrespective of your ideology.
Unrelated to her job? Bullshit, she was a press secretary. Their job is to engage in public relations for their boss. Publishing an opinion counter to your boss's position is simply not allowed under any circumstances. Imagine if Tony Snow had posted on his Facebook page that he thought John McCain was a loon, how long do you think he would have lasted? Boo hoo for this stupid woman. By her actions she showed her boss that she can not be trusted. How is he to know that she will not let her personal opinions slip into his official press releases? Anyone doing what she did would be fired, on any side of the political spectrum. Hell, if she'd said the same thing about some Republican, she would have been fired. You don't get to have personal opinions about politics when you are a press secretary, if you don't like that, get a different job. Spouting out grade school level insults simply proves that she does not have what it takes to be a press secretary.
Guess what? Words have consequences. That CA model was an idiot, she deserved what she got. If you spout out idiotic rants in public, people may not want to do business with you, go figure. Selfish assholes like you think free speech means you get to say whatever you want, and nobody is allowed to take offense. That's not how things work in the real world, champ. If you talk like an asshole, people will assume you are an asshole, and most people don't want to have much to do with assholes.
Cry me a river, troll.
That's what I get for not quoting the post I was replying to. Commodore64_love suggested sticking one's head in a microwave to prove that EM waves effect living tissue. I was merely saying the sun would prove the same thing.
Well, yes. Also, sunburn. And skin cancer, blah, blah blah. That's my point, the sun has an effect on organic tissue, and we all know it. However, the sun is not 'low level' by any means, the physical mechanism of damage or allergy is well understood and consistent with known laws of physics.
Based on the snippet of my post that you quoted, I assume you believe your post to be some sort of refutation of my point. Solar Urticaria is NOT caused by low level EM waves, it is caused by high intensity sunlight. Which, as I mentioned, we all know causes damage.
Fentanyl is a synthetic opioid used as a major analgesic. Lithium is an alkali metal used to treat manic depression. Perhaps you were referring to lithium's use to treat certain kinds of headaches? That's the only overlap I can think of.
You, on the other hand, are just plain crazy. Persecution complex much? Coupled with a little narcissism, delusions of grandeur, and paranoia. Take off the tinfoil hat, the ebil gubermint is NOT out to enslave you to pay for welfare mothers on crack. You are NOT an uber-man who is being held down by the lazy parasites of society. Stop blaming the government for everything wrong in your life, chances are the problem has been in you all along. And last but not least, your bitter whining is NOT comedy.
Dude, no one disbelieves that EM waves can have an effect on organic tissue. For a much safer and less sarcastic and condescending proof, GO OUT IN THE SUN. I don't believe that low level EM waves can have such a deleterious effect. I also believe that no scientific study has shown any correlation. Finally, I believe that people claiming to have such a condition respond to fake exposure they know about, and do not respond to real exposure they DON'T know about. In conclusion, while I accept the fact that this may possibly have a slight chance of being real, my working hypothesis is that these people are making shit up because they are crazy hypochondriacs.
And I plan on missing Windows 7, as well.
AC was being a dick, but you just brought up a completely different point. The first issue you mentioned was lack of potable water. The second issue was destruction of estuaries. These two things are not related. While destruction of estuaries is at least possibly an issue (and I'm quite positive you don't know for sure, you just want to seem smart and concerned about the planet, so you bring up anything you think might possibly be an issue, but you are JUST GUESSING,) the idea that we could get fresh water out of estuaries is NOT, as pointed out so eloquently by our dickish AC friend.
However, this slip is not the most hilarious part of your posts. In order to see what the really, really outrageously funny part is, consider the impact on estuaries of extracting fresh water from them. I'll wait...
I'll use it however I like. If I want to use iTunes with a home built Internet Rice Cooker/MP3 Player, I will. Boo fucking hoo for Apple, where do they get off trying to tell me what I will and will not do with my computer, software, and other hardware? You masochistic, submissive Apple fanboys may get off on being dominated by your Apple-daddy but the rest of us don't swing that way.
Oh, I don't really care about the judgmentalism, or any other form of mentalism, for that matter. I just like MC Hawking.
Look, we old folks may seem 'wiggity-wack' to you young whippersnappers, but let me assure you, we are dope, fresh and fly.
It's a quote from MC Hawking's song, "Fuck the Creationists." Very funny stuff. "You down with entropy? Yeah you know me!"
Or, you know, maybe the servers don't serve the workstations, but some type of external entity that buys some sort of a service, what do you call them? Customers? Nah, it would have to be that mean old incompetent government, the source of all evil. Why is that the go-to fall guy around here? Am I the only one who has seen the same level of incompetance in the private sector?
Haha, beat you to it by mere seconds. OpenNMS in the hizzouse! :)
It's open source, it's free, it's a complete network management system, and you can import existing asset information as well as populate through network discovery. We use it here at the New Mexico Child Youth and Family Development Department, with 53 offices, 2500 workstations, and 80 servers.
http://opennms.org/
I couldn't have put it better than you just did. We, as a society find it useful to pursue this research, but no company can monetize it without patenting patently un-patentable procedures, so we should socialize the costs of the research. Thankfully, when the free market fails us, we do have other options besides letting some unscrupulous and selfish idiots bend us over a barrel.
Somebody better tell Terry not to wear a red shirt while investigating this. If he ever finds himself wearing a red shirt while away from the ship with only, say, his captain and the first mate, Terry is not coming back.
No, they are only available to the military, thus, the commercial must have been a joke. However, anyone can acquire a million dollars. Therefore, there is some doubt whether this was a joke. I mean, yeah, it is pretty obvious the lawyer was not serious, but is 'pretty obvious' good enough? I guess we'll find out at the trial, if it goes to trial. Whichever way that goes, it is the original lawyer who loses and the law student who wins. The lawyer loses face, while the law student gains a reputation. Who would you hire, a dumbass who makes easily disproven claims, or the guy who goes out of his way to disprove them? To me, that law student looks pretty smart, and I'd hire him over the original lawyer any day (you know, assuming he passes the bar.) I don't think that kid ever expected to get his million dollars. He expected to get a little cheap publicity for his own law career.
How many murders were committed the year of this trial? How many other trials were there? Do you care about all of them? Not in an abstract sense, because anyone can claim to care about something they have just heard about: in a real sense, DO YOU CARE? If your answer is anything but, 'no, I do not care in any concrete sense of the word' then we know you are a liar. You may care about 'justice' and 'people' and other abstract concepts, and these trials represent those concepts, but you do not actually care about the people involved because you do not know them and have never in your life done anything for them. Seriously, have you spared one moment of thought for any of them? How could you have, you don't know anything about those trials, they are, to you, completely abstract. Like this case. Weedhopper was being honest, you are merely pontificating about morality, possibly to make yourself look better. You are a what I like to call a Care Troll. You probably also feign offense when people joke about the recently dead, don't you? Care Trolls don't really care about anything but looking superior to others.