On the contrary. I consider the very concept of private property to be fundamentally evil.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're willing to own stuff anyway, with some convoluted explanation of how convenience trumps not being evil.
I don't doubt what you observed. But as a different observation so that we all don't lose heart, I installed Ubuntu 10.4 on my 75-year-old Mom's three year old Dell, since her XP install had become too slow to use, and she figured everything out right away. Well, okay, except F-Spot, but I sat down with her and showed her that and she's been fine ever since.
The guy referred to "saving a bundle of cash and a ton of time", from which I inferred that he just wanted to play the game at all. For that, WINE might work.
That's not to dismiss what you're saying, though. I too wish they'd make a Linux version of Civ V.
No, I agree one shouldn't try to have that one both ways. But don't some airlines already make obese people pay for two seats, at least under certain circumstances?
That's awesome, because it means that those of us who pack light no longer subsidize those of you who don't. Jet fuel is expensive, and since it takes more of it to tote your big fat bag around, I'm happy for you to pay for it.
Gosh I really can't imagine why Petroleum Geologists might feel reluctant to accept that CO2 emissions are the cause of dangerous climate change.
Fair enough, and it's probably no coincidence that they were the last ones to switch from a position of skepticism to one of uncertainty. But that explanation doesn't apply to the other groups. Besides, if the implication is that their source of funding makes them unreliable, doesn't that mean that similar analysis of the funding for climatologists on the other side of the issue is also fair?
Either way, I didn't say it makes sense to ignore the majority of climatologists who express concern. It doesn't. But it does make sense to ask critical questions about the methods they're using to make such dramatic predictions, especially when those predictions have policy consequences that extend far outside their own field.
You're right that no major scientific organization is openly skeptical of climate change now. But the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, American Association of State Climatologists, American Geological Institute, American Institute of Professional Geologists, and Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences have all issued statements that are non-committal. If they're still uncertain, why is is it so irrational for anyone else to be?
I'm not saying that climate change isn't real, isn't caused by us, or isn't a net bad thing for humanity. I don't know those things. But I do have experience dealing with academics. And when they fudge data, distort peer review to suppress dissent, and don't release the code they use in their all-important computer models, it's hardly unreasonable for someone to conclude that they're less than perfectly confident.
I've had 4 Chevys over the past 4 years. They didn't break down, I just went through them for various reasons. And I loved them all. In particular I miss the Cobalt, it was nice.
Four in four years, without breakdowns? One was hit by a meteor, one was destroyed by a UFO when you were abducted by aliens, one was sucked into an interdimensional vortex, and one was stolen by Neil Patrick Harris?
You've just brilliantly explained why I'm glad my teenager decided to focus on learning Mandarin rather than Spanish. If he's going to spend his whole life in their century, he might as well adapt to it.
I never used RHX, so this is a serious question: What did this give people that, for example, Synaptic Package Manager or even the Ubuntu Software Center doesn't?
Slashdot Mirror
On the contrary. I consider the very concept of private property to be fundamentally evil.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you're willing to own stuff anyway, with some convoluted explanation of how convenience trumps not being evil.
Ah, in that case the system is working splendidly. Thank you for putting my lower back pain into perspective.
Ah, you must not be old enough to have lower back pain yet.
If so, then the proper response would have been: "We'll be sure to give your concerns all due consideration."
This assumes that civilization falls between now and then, and falls hard. I like to hope that it won't.
I don't doubt what you observed. But as a different observation so that we all don't lose heart, I installed Ubuntu 10.4 on my 75-year-old Mom's three year old Dell, since her XP install had become too slow to use, and she figured everything out right away. Well, okay, except F-Spot, but I sat down with her and showed her that and she's been fine ever since.
Mod parent up (she's a women).
I'm not sure an obsequious approach like that will work, but good luck!
Then can I have your points?
The guy referred to "saving a bundle of cash and a ton of time", from which I inferred that he just wanted to play the game at all. For that, WINE might work.
That's not to dismiss what you're saying, though. I too wish they'd make a Linux version of Civ V.
Wait, does this mean that you found the rest of the scenario to be realistic?
I haven't tried it, but the WINE Apps DB says Civ 4 works pretty well. Perhaps Civ 5 will also.
No, I agree one shouldn't try to have that one both ways. But don't some airlines already make obese people pay for two seats, at least under certain circumstances?
That's awesome, because it means that those of us who pack light no longer subsidize those of you who don't. Jet fuel is expensive, and since it takes more of it to tote your big fat bag around, I'm happy for you to pay for it.
Troll? Seriously? It was a joke -- if you laughed then mod the guy funny, if not then leave him alone.
Historically, it just tends to wipe out France.
Gosh I really can't imagine why Petroleum Geologists might feel reluctant to accept that CO2 emissions are the cause of dangerous climate change.
Fair enough, and it's probably no coincidence that they were the last ones to switch from a position of skepticism to one of uncertainty. But that explanation doesn't apply to the other groups. Besides, if the implication is that their source of funding makes them unreliable, doesn't that mean that similar analysis of the funding for climatologists on the other side of the issue is also fair?
Either way, I didn't say it makes sense to ignore the majority of climatologists who express concern. It doesn't. But it does make sense to ask critical questions about the methods they're using to make such dramatic predictions, especially when those predictions have policy consequences that extend far outside their own field.
You're right that no major scientific organization is openly skeptical of climate change now. But the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, American Association of State Climatologists, American Geological Institute, American Institute of Professional Geologists, and Canadian Federation of Earth Sciences have all issued statements that are non-committal. If they're still uncertain, why is is it so irrational for anyone else to be?
I'm not saying that climate change isn't real, isn't caused by us, or isn't a net bad thing for humanity. I don't know those things. But I do have experience dealing with academics. And when they fudge data, distort peer review to suppress dissent, and don't release the code they use in their all-important computer models, it's hardly unreasonable for someone to conclude that they're less than perfectly confident.
I've had 4 Chevys over the past 4 years. They didn't break down, I just went through them for various reasons. And I loved them all. In particular I miss the Cobalt, it was nice.
Four in four years, without breakdowns? One was hit by a meteor, one was destroyed by a UFO when you were abducted by aliens, one was sucked into an interdimensional vortex, and one was stolen by Neil Patrick Harris?
Sec. 34, Perpetuities and monopolies, was interesting too:
"Perpetuities and monopolies are contrary to the genius of a free state and shall not be allowed."
It's too bad copyright is federal.
Eliminating diseases aren't especially useful, since many diseases simply kill people, which is what we want - population reduction.
I don't know who "we" are who want this, but whoever you all are, by all means please feel free to get together, share some horrific disease, and die.
You've just brilliantly explained why I'm glad my teenager decided to focus on learning Mandarin rather than Spanish. If he's going to spend his whole life in their century, he might as well adapt to it.
God, why do you synaesthesiacs always have sound so fucking indigo?
I never used RHX, so this is a serious question: What did this give people that, for example, Synaptic Package Manager or even the Ubuntu Software Center doesn't?
Come on, Alec, at least create an account with a fake name so we don't instantly know it's you.
If most OSS projects can't survive without corporate sponsorship and guidance, then the OSS model is a failure and needs to be rexamined.
That's only the case if the real goal of the OSS model is to oppose corporations, which was not my understanding.