Saying you want applicants with experience using MS Office is not the same thing as saying you use MS Office. Maybe they have other reasons? For example, someone who knows MS Office may be better suited at knowing how _not_ to design a competing product.;)
Then you may be surprised. I bought something from Home Depot online once. Now I'll occasionally get emails about in-store purchases I make when I use the same credit card in-store that I did for that one online purchase. So while I do not know what other info they may have on me, at the very least, Home Depot knows that that credit card and that email address go together.
how did you find somebody willing to swap the card?
They went upstairs.;)
Joking aside, I've been using my parents' cards since I first started making the occasional purchase with my own money, and continue to use their cards even long after I've moved out. And at least one of my aunts/uncles does the same, but with the cards that their parents / my grandparents originally signed up for.
Stop capitalizing god, is shows unnecessary respect for absurd superstitions.
Bilbo Baggins is also a fictional character. Does that mean we should stop capitalizing his name? Of course not, because capitalizing a name has nothing to do with whether or not the noun being referenced is real. Though you may have a point when it comes to He, Him, and all the other pronouns that people capitalize when referring to their particular flavor of God. However, such capitalization isn't always about showing respect.
Not always. I read some guidelines related to government projects (though I do not think it was for the Federal government. I think it was for county or state), and they explicitly stated that the bottom few bids were to be thrown out, as a means of encouraging the companies bidding to not cut corners in an attempt to get the lowest bid.
This must be something new. Like, within the last few months new. Because out of the few consumer-grade Western Digital drives I've had to RMA over the years (one from May of this year), not once did I need to run any sort of program before I could generate the RMA and ship the drive back. Nope, it was as simple as entering the serial number in a form on their website, verifying that the drive was under warranty, and clicking "Generate RMA".
If they were able to determine the age of the fake identify by tracking it they would have broken the law.
You don't need to know the age of the user to be able to say "well, this account was created 13 years ago today, so therefore the user must be at least 13 years old by now". At least I think that is what AC was getting at.
Which response do you think the NRA-types are giving?
What exactly is an "NRA-type" person? Is it a person who is a member of the NRA? In that case, I'd say "both". Some NRA members (such as the ones in my immediate family) will give the first. Others with whom I have only briefly crossed paths with would say the second.
But if "NRA-type" means something different, then you'll have to explain what you mean.
does it really make much sense that liberals, who detest restrictions on speech, on what you can do with your own bodies, on people being jailed, would actually, normally, be in favor - in principle - of someone owning a device as long as they used it responsibly?
I'm confused. Are you trying to claim that liberals are only in favor of people owning guns if those people use guns irresponsibly?
I'm sorry, what part of "Lets ignore the fact that the man is dead and instead pretend that he is alive and in prison" was difficult for you to comprehend? If you oppose the pardon because the man is dead, but are ok with pardons for people still alive, just say so.
Yes, there is. You claim that we would be "throwing logic out the window" if we were to release a person from prison because the reason for which they were incarcerated is no longer a crime. I for one would love to know how you came to that conclusion.
The only things that matters is what the law says should apply.
So you are saying that you believe we would be "throwing logic out the window" because the law says that people incarcerated of something that is not currently a crime, even if it was a crime when they first did it, must continue to serve their sentence? If the law truly does say that, then I suppose you would be right. But I would love to see a citation for that law.
shall we throw logic out the window to make the masses happy?
Lets ignore the fact that the man is dead and instead pretend that he is alive and in prison. How are we "throwing logic out the window" to release a person from prison because the law that put him there was changed/repealed?
No, the real question here is why you think it is ok to incarcerate someone for something that is no longer a crime, just because it was a crime when they did it.
Yes and no. We all have the right to make anonymous speech. We're both doing it right now. What we don't necessarily have is the right to silence others for telling the world who "SeaFox" or "Golddess" are in real life.
Increasing a sentence based upon racist intent is racist.
Not necessarily. Increasing a sentence solely because the attacker was white and the victim was black is racist. Letting intent factor into a sentence is not. And it isn't like that is a new concept. Is it wrong to sentence two different people differently because one committed a purposeful homicide while the other did so on accident?
Do you have a link to the law that says writing viruses is illegal?
I don't know if any have passed, but I believe/. has covered a few attempts to do so in various countries. Or I could be misremembering those articles.
Would you be happy inserting SS in place of X? No, certainly not, that would be silly.
Except that the point that OP was making has nothing to do with "don't be angry", but instead is about directing that anger at the appropriate source. The SS isn't going to change just because you do not like them.
For something that hits a little more home, lets change SS to TSA. Being angry at the TSA isn't going to change how they operate. You have to put pressure on the law makers if you want the TSA to change their ways.
While I agree with you from the standpoint that "Earth Avoids Collision" can make sense even if Earth and the colliding object did nothing special to try and avoid the collision, being 18x the distance from Earth that the moon is doesn't really register to me as an "OMG WE WERE ALMOST HIT" event.
Slashdot Mirror
Saying you want applicants with experience using MS Office is not the same thing as saying you use MS Office. Maybe they have other reasons? For example, someone who knows MS Office may be better suited at knowing how _not_ to design a competing product. ;)
Then you may be surprised. I bought something from Home Depot online once. Now I'll occasionally get emails about in-store purchases I make when I use the same credit card in-store that I did for that one online purchase. So while I do not know what other info they may have on me, at the very least, Home Depot knows that that credit card and that email address go together.
how did you find somebody willing to swap the card?
They went upstairs. ;)
Joking aside, I've been using my parents' cards since I first started making the occasional purchase with my own money, and continue to use their cards even long after I've moved out. And at least one of my aunts/uncles does the same, but with the cards that their parents / my grandparents originally signed up for.
Stop capitalizing god, is shows unnecessary respect for absurd superstitions.
Bilbo Baggins is also a fictional character. Does that mean we should stop capitalizing his name? Of course not, because capitalizing a name has nothing to do with whether or not the noun being referenced is real. Though you may have a point when it comes to He, Him, and all the other pronouns that people capitalize when referring to their particular flavor of God. However, such capitalization isn't always about showing respect.
Not always. I read some guidelines related to government projects (though I do not think it was for the Federal government. I think it was for county or state), and they explicitly stated that the bottom few bids were to be thrown out, as a means of encouraging the companies bidding to not cut corners in an attempt to get the lowest bid.
Running the tool needed to generate an RMA
This must be something new. Like, within the last few months new. Because out of the few consumer-grade Western Digital drives I've had to RMA over the years (one from May of this year), not once did I need to run any sort of program before I could generate the RMA and ship the drive back. Nope, it was as simple as entering the serial number in a form on their website, verifying that the drive was under warranty, and clicking "Generate RMA".
Odd, works for me. Dunno why yours gets cut off, but it should end in "z is from 0.01 to 2.5"
If they were able to determine the age of the fake identify by tracking it they would have broken the law.
You don't need to know the age of the user to be able to say "well, this account was created 13 years ago today, so therefore the user must be at least 13 years old by now". At least I think that is what AC was getting at.
Which response do you think the NRA-types are giving?
What exactly is an "NRA-type" person? Is it a person who is a member of the NRA? In that case, I'd say "both". Some NRA members (such as the ones in my immediate family) will give the first. Others with whom I have only briefly crossed paths with would say the second.
But if "NRA-type" means something different, then you'll have to explain what you mean.
does it really make much sense that liberals, who detest restrictions on speech, on what you can do with your own bodies, on people being jailed, would actually, normally, be in favor - in principle - of someone owning a device as long as they used it responsibly?
I'm confused. Are you trying to claim that liberals are only in favor of people owning guns if those people use guns irresponsibly?
"Monkey not know this glucose thing that AC speak of. Monkey just know that monkey hungry, and banana make monkey not hungry." -A. Monkey
Maybe it's something like that for the spider?
Commander Keen seemed to get by ok.
I'm sorry, what part of "Lets ignore the fact that the man is dead and instead pretend that he is alive and in prison" was difficult for you to comprehend? If you oppose the pardon because the man is dead, but are ok with pardons for people still alive, just say so.
There is no room for what I think in this.
Yes, there is. You claim that we would be "throwing logic out the window" if we were to release a person from prison because the reason for which they were incarcerated is no longer a crime. I for one would love to know how you came to that conclusion.
The only things that matters is what the law says should apply.
So you are saying that you believe we would be "throwing logic out the window" because the law says that people incarcerated of something that is not currently a crime, even if it was a crime when they first did it, must continue to serve their sentence? If the law truly does say that, then I suppose you would be right. But I would love to see a citation for that law.
shall we throw logic out the window to make the masses happy?
Lets ignore the fact that the man is dead and instead pretend that he is alive and in prison. How are we "throwing logic out the window" to release a person from prison because the law that put him there was changed/repealed?
No, the real question here is why you think it is ok to incarcerate someone for something that is no longer a crime, just because it was a crime when they did it.
I knew the WBC were a bunch of despicable individuals, but I did not realize that they've killed anyone.
Free speech does not mean the right to anonymity
Yes and no. We all have the right to make anonymous speech. We're both doing it right now. What we don't necessarily have is the right to silence others for telling the world who "SeaFox" or "Golddess" are in real life.
Increasing a sentence based upon racist intent is racist.
Not necessarily. Increasing a sentence solely because the attacker was white and the victim was black is racist. Letting intent factor into a sentence is not. And it isn't like that is a new concept. Is it wrong to sentence two different people differently because one committed a purposeful homicide while the other did so on accident?
Who would you rather face? A knife wielding attacker or a gun wielding attacker?
The gun wielder of course.
I thought so.
So you are in agreement with Nadaka then?
The issue is not whether religion needs treatment, but whether we have the right to force that treatment on others.
Depends. Are they forcing their religion on others? The answer to that question is the answer to yours.
Yes, but could that one have caused a cataclysmic impact? It seemed too small, but then I'm hardly qualified to judge such things.
Do you have a link to the law that says writing viruses is illegal?
I don't know if any have passed, but I believe /. has covered a few attempts to do so in various countries. Or I could be misremembering those articles.
Would you be happy inserting SS in place of X? No, certainly not, that would be silly.
Except that the point that OP was making has nothing to do with "don't be angry", but instead is about directing that anger at the appropriate source. The SS isn't going to change just because you do not like them.
For something that hits a little more home, lets change SS to TSA. Being angry at the TSA isn't going to change how they operate. You have to put pressure on the law makers if you want the TSA to change their ways.
Can you actually copyright a religion
Sure, just look at scientology.
While I agree with you from the standpoint that "Earth Avoids Collision" can make sense even if Earth and the colliding object did nothing special to try and avoid the collision, being 18x the distance from Earth that the moon is doesn't really register to me as an "OMG WE WERE ALMOST HIT" event.