I agree with your first three criteria for proper health but claims that regular chiropractic adjustments benefit the patient are as scientifically verifiable as vaccines causing autism.
Most chiropractors are simply snake oil salesmen with nicer offices.
...and when the LORD your God has delivered them over to you and you have defeated them, then you must destroy them totally. Make no treaty with them, and show them no mercy. Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the LORD's anger will burn against you and will quickly destroy you. This is what you are to do to them: Break down their altars, smash their sacred stones, cut down their Asherah poles and burn their idols in the fire.
Deuteronomy 7:2-5
And how about this:
If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, "Let us go and worship other gods" (gods that neither you nor your fathers have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to him or listen to him. Show him no pity. Do not spare him or shield him. You must certainly put him to death. Your hand must be the first in putting him to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone him to death, because he tried to turn you away from the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
Deuteronomy 13:6-11
Or this:
While the Israelites were in the desert, a man was found gathering wood on the Sabbath day. Those who found him gathering wood brought him to Moses and Aaron and the whole assembly, and they kept him in custody, because it was not clear what should be done to him. Then the LORD said to Moses, "The man must die. The whole assembly must stone him outside the camp." So the assembly took him outside the camp and stoned him to death, as the LORD commanded Moses.
Numbers 15:32-36
It's not only what's in the Qur'an or the Christian Bible that matters but how people choose to interpret those words. For people like the 9/11 hijackers and this preacher down in Florida they have chosen the most hateful, intolerant interpretation.
Thankfully the overwhelming majority of people on both sides don't subscribe to those interpretations.
For once an AC that makes an insightful comment and me without mod points.
The terrorists have continued to win since 9/11 because they continue to successfully insight terror.
And every time you hear a call to accept this search or give up that privacy because if we don't then the terrorists win...don't bother, they just did.
And this map doesn't even include Alaska...which is almost half the size of the US mainland.
The contiguous US is 770 million hectares and Alaska is 150 million hectares. That makes Alaska less than 20% the size of the contiguous US which is hardly "almost half the size".
I agree. Different external devices have different requirements and trying to come up with a single spec to satisfy them all is going to result in a spec that is either too bloated it will be a monster to evolve or too full of compromises to be useful or possibly both.
I'd rather see one spec for high throughput devices like hard drives and raid arrays and a second spec for lower throughput devices like mice, keyboards and flash/portable drives.
This is not Lord of the Rings. We don't need the one cable "to rule them all".
I do not defend the Islamic extremists that you describe. I do defend the vast majority of Muslims who only want to practise their religion peacefully.
And I do not have scorn for people who defend freedom. I have scorn for people who hide their hatred by claiming to be defending freedom. It's ironic that the way to defend freedom is to take away freedom, in this case religious freedom.
If you are sincere about defending freedom then defend their right to practise their religion in peace.
I think you should reread the GP again. He referred to "a nation full of fear mongerers and bigots who accuse them of terrorism". He did not claim that all Christians were fear mongers and bigots he said the nation was.
And after the all the crontroversy over the planned Islamic information centre (not a mosque as the media portrays) near ground zero it's a fair assessment. Especially since there are other Islamic information centres in the area that pre-date the completion of the first World Trade Center building.
But hey, when did fear mongers and bigots let silly things like facts get in the way.
1) Pander to corporate donors at the expense of his/her constituents. 2) Visit prostitutes. I guess a prostitute in the constituency would count as meeting with a constituent.
I agree that an OSS centralized social networking service like Facebook would likely be a mess. A distributed network like Diaspora would eliminate the problems you pointed out. That is, assuming the interfaces between the nodes are well defined and stable.
I never joined Facebook because I generally don't trust free services. They eventually have to make money and that generally comes from selling their users' information but an open, distributed network allows for free services for those who don't mind trading their information for the service and paid services for those of us who want more privacy.
There was nothing in the summary that even remotely suggested the solution you envisioned.
The phrase "blocking data collection" to me suggests preventing the server from doing something rather than cooperating with the server and expecting it to honour your request. Considering the industry we are talking about expecting it to honour anything is a naive at best.
And I'm sorry if you found my comment smarmy...I was going for sarcastic.
I think you missed the 2nd of 3 sentences in the summary (emphasis added by me):
The agency's preferred method for accomplishing this would be a browser-based tool that would give users the option of blocking data collection across the Web.
A browser-based solution would by definition not be a server-side solution.
I know it's too much to expect people to read the articles here but if you can't even make it though 3 sentences of summary why even bother.
That would be true if the back button restored the state of all pages properly.
Sites that make use of collapsible sections do not always maintain their previous state when you back up to them. For example, I do this with Wikipedia and the collapsible section after the external links. As I check out the various links it saves me having to reopen the collapsible section every time which can quickly become rather tedious.
Also, a search results page is often problematic backing up to.
Again India, they try to produce super cheap stuff nobody real wants. Why would I buy their junk, when 2nd hand stuff in my country cost the same and is much better? I can already get a 2nd hand PC for almost nothing, but since I earn enough, I want to spoil myself.
India isn't trying to sell you anything. From the article:
The project is part of an ambitious education technology initiative, which also aims to bring broadband connectivity to India's 25,000 colleges and 504 universities and make study materials available online.
You first. You're the one(s) who are supporting the FCC Plan to kill-off channels 25 and up for antenna television. We have occupied this "lawn" since the 1950s and don't want to give it up. We enjoy getting free entertainment, news, foreign programming, tornado warnings, and so on. We've already agreed to give channels 52 to 83 for cellphone & internet expansion. We've shared. We've done our part. No more.
What a completely incoherent response to my post about broadband internet speeds. What, if anything, did I say that had anything even remotely to do with the FCC's policy wrt antenna television. You might want to check your eyes and/or reading comprehension as my entire post was about broadband internet speeds.
Since reading and comprehension seem to be a problem for you I will point out that the article mentions nothing about wireless spectrum or antenna television. I suspect that you have your panties in a bunch about some FCC policy wrt antenna television and have transposed that onto every mention of the FCC to create a conspiracy in your mind. You might want to double up on the tinfoil hat as some of the FCC mind control rays appear to be getting through.
Also, I highly doubt that I am "the one(s) who are supporting the FCC Plan to kill-off channels 25 and up for antenna television" since I'm a Canadian and I couldn't give a flying fig what the FCC does. Now if you want to discuss the CRTC's (the Canadian equivalent of the FCC) policy wrt to cable company funding of local television then I'll be more than happy to hear your views.
Why do we need all those highways. Other than rush hour they're mostly empty.
The first modem I used was a 300bps acoustic coupler. Who would need a 2400bps modem? That's just a waste of bandwidth. Who could possibly use all that?
Flash forward 20 years and I went from a 56k modem to 1M DSL. I must have been insane. What could I possibly do that could need that kind of capacity? If it weren't for that kind of growth there might never have been anything like YouTube, Facebook, Skype, etc.
The 100M line is not necessarily needed to satisfy the applications of today but it will inspire the applications of tomorrow.
I get tired of people who pull out one aspect of a coherent statement and think they're clever when they argue that that one aspect, taken out of context, is flawed. How about evaluating the statement as a whole rather than cherry picking your arguments?
Slashdot Mirror
They're not the cheapest but I use Domains For You. They have a good selection of TLDs and they don't try to upsell you.
I agree with your first three criteria for proper health but claims that regular chiropractic adjustments benefit the patient are as scientifically verifiable as vaccines causing autism.
Most chiropractors are simply snake oil salesmen with nicer offices.
Sounds a lot like this:
And how about this:
Or this:
It's not only what's in the Qur'an or the Christian Bible that matters but how people choose to interpret those words. For people like the 9/11 hijackers and this preacher down in Florida they have chosen the most hateful, intolerant interpretation.
Thankfully the overwhelming majority of people on both sides don't subscribe to those interpretations.
Of course, you're right. I guess my brain was in neutral.
I've made my share of spelling/grammar Nazi comments so I deserve this.
For once an AC that makes an insightful comment and me without mod points.
The terrorists have continued to win since 9/11 because they continue to successfully insight terror.
And every time you hear a call to accept this search or give up that privacy because if we don't then the terrorists win...don't bother, they just did.
The contiguous US is 770 million hectares and Alaska is 150 million hectares. That makes Alaska less than 20% the size of the contiguous US which is hardly "almost half the size".
I agree. Different external devices have different requirements and trying to come up with a single spec to satisfy them all is going to result in a spec that is either too bloated it will be a monster to evolve or too full of compromises to be useful or possibly both.
I'd rather see one spec for high throughput devices like hard drives and raid arrays and a second spec for lower throughput devices like mice, keyboards and flash/portable drives.
This is not Lord of the Rings. We don't need the one cable "to rule them all".
Corporate entities are guaranteed to make completely irrational decisions.
There, fixed that for you.
And for some it's much shorter. As a director Lucas' peek was 1973-77.
I do not defend the Islamic extremists that you describe. I do defend the vast majority of Muslims who only want to practise their religion peacefully.
And I do not have scorn for people who defend freedom. I have scorn for people who hide their hatred by claiming to be defending freedom. It's ironic that the way to defend freedom is to take away freedom, in this case religious freedom.
If you are sincere about defending freedom then defend their right to practise their religion in peace.
I think you should reread the GP again. He referred to "a nation full of fear mongerers and bigots who accuse them of terrorism". He did not claim that all Christians were fear mongers and bigots he said the nation was.
And after the all the crontroversy over the planned Islamic information centre (not a mosque as the media portrays) near ground zero it's a fair assessment. Especially since there are other Islamic information centres in the area that pre-date the completion of the first World Trade Center building.
But hey, when did fear mongers and bigots let silly things like facts get in the way.
1) Pander to corporate donors at the expense of his/her constituents.
2) Visit prostitutes. I guess a prostitute in the constituency would count as meeting with a constituent.
Yeah, because free wi-fi is a right. Oh wait, it isn't!
Not since PETA shutdown the last Chipmunk press.
Godzilla is not real.
I agree that an OSS centralized social networking service like Facebook would likely be a mess. A distributed network like Diaspora would eliminate the problems you pointed out. That is, assuming the interfaces between the nodes are well defined and stable.
I never joined Facebook because I generally don't trust free services. They eventually have to make money and that generally comes from selling their users' information but an open, distributed network allows for free services for those who don't mind trading their information for the service and paid services for those of us who want more privacy.
There was nothing in the summary that even remotely suggested the solution you envisioned.
The phrase "blocking data collection" to me suggests preventing the server from doing something rather than cooperating with the server and expecting it to honour your request. Considering the industry we are talking about expecting it to honour anything is a naive at best.
And I'm sorry if you found my comment smarmy...I was going for sarcastic.
I think you missed the 2nd of 3 sentences in the summary (emphasis added by me):
A browser-based solution would by definition not be a server-side solution.
I know it's too much to expect people to read the articles here but if you can't even make it though 3 sentences of summary why even bother.
That would be true if the back button restored the state of all pages properly.
Sites that make use of collapsible sections do not always maintain their previous state when you back up to them. For example, I do this with Wikipedia and the collapsible section after the external links. As I check out the various links it saves me having to reopen the collapsible section every time which can quickly become rather tedious.
Also, a search results page is often problematic backing up to.
Then you've got a crappy C compiler.
India isn't trying to sell you anything. From the article:
I didn't realize RMS posted on Slashdot.
What a completely incoherent response to my post about broadband internet speeds. What, if anything, did I say that had anything even remotely to do with the FCC's policy wrt antenna television. You might want to check your eyes and/or reading comprehension as my entire post was about broadband internet speeds.
Since reading and comprehension seem to be a problem for you I will point out that the article mentions nothing about wireless spectrum or antenna television. I suspect that you have your panties in a bunch about some FCC policy wrt antenna television and have transposed that onto every mention of the FCC to create a conspiracy in your mind. You might want to double up on the tinfoil hat as some of the FCC mind control rays appear to be getting through.
Also, I highly doubt that I am "the one(s) who are supporting the FCC Plan to kill-off channels 25 and up for antenna television" since I'm a Canadian and I couldn't give a flying fig what the FCC does. Now if you want to discuss the CRTC's (the Canadian equivalent of the FCC) policy wrt to cable company funding of local television then I'll be more than happy to hear your views.
Why do we need all those highways. Other than rush hour they're mostly empty.
The first modem I used was a 300bps acoustic coupler. Who would need a 2400bps modem? That's just a waste of bandwidth. Who could possibly use all that?
Flash forward 20 years and I went from a 56k modem to 1M DSL. I must have been insane. What could I possibly do that could need that kind of capacity? If it weren't for that kind of growth there might never have been anything like YouTube, Facebook, Skype, etc.
The 100M line is not necessarily needed to satisfy the applications of today but it will inspire the applications of tomorrow.
Oh, and one more thing...
GET OFF MY LAWN!
I get tired of people who pull out one aspect of a coherent statement and think they're clever when they argue that that one aspect, taken out of context, is flawed. How about evaluating the statement as a whole rather than cherry picking your arguments?