I'd be more impressed if a visiting dignitary said "Such meager conditions for such a powerful man!" and our president said "I work for the American people and refuse to waste their money for my pleasure."
Except that in that scenario, would it really be a waste of money? The visiting dignitary is a guest of our nation after all. Is it not customary where you come from to "break out the good china" as I believe the saying goes, when you invite guests over?
I think he's a little bit of both (I'm not just referring to W. but to all Presidents). The President is not only the leader of our government, but also the head of state. Like it or not, he is the personification of The United States, both domestically and abroad.
In times of war, the POTUS is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. In times of peace, an ambassador to other nations. And at all times, a check/balance on the power of the other two branches. Those are the only roles the POTUS should be playing.
That doesn't mean I think the POTUS should live a live of poverty. I agree that as an ambassador, certain excessive ceremonies need to be on display. But it just seemed like you were trying to give the executive branch more power than it should have with that statement.
For the record, I agree with you that there is little difference between an individual a few weeks prior to birth, up through weeks, months, or even years after birth. But House makes a good point IMO in this quote from One Day, One Room:
Patient: "Abortion is murder."
House: "True. It's a life and you should end it."
Patient: "Every life is sacred."
House: "Come on. Talk to me. Don't quote me bumper stickers."
Patient: "It's true."
House: "It's meaningless."
Patient: "It means that every life matters to God."
House: "Not to me. Not to you. Judging by the number of natural disasters, not to God either."
Patient: "You're just being argumentative."
House: "Yeah. I do do that. What about Hitler? Was his life sacred to God? Father of your child. Is his life sacred to you?"
Patient: "My child isn't Hitler."
House: "Either every life is sacred or-"
Patient: "Stop it! I don't want to chat about philosophy."
House: "You're not killing your rape baby because of a philosophy."
Patient: "It's murder. I'm against it. You for it?"
House: "Not as a general rule."
Patient: "Just for unborn children?"
House: "Yes. The problem with exceptions to rules is the line-drawing. It might make sense for us to kill the ass that did this to you. I mean, where do we draw the line? Which asses do we get to kill and which asses get to keep on being asses. The nice thing about the abortion debate is that we can quibble over trimesters but ultimately, there's a nice clean line: birth. Morally there isn't a lot of difference. Practically, huge."
It's a tricky subject to be sure. Just for the record, before I go into my diatribe, I am pro-choice.
At what point does a fetus begin to qualify? 15 weeks? 30? 40? Do they continue to remain unqualified for weeks, months, or even years after they've escaped the womb? After all, birth is just some arbitrary action, the creature within the womb became able to exit some time ago.
Again, I am pro-choice. This is just me playing Devil's Advocate.
Aren't PS/2 ports just for keyboards and mice? And could serial and parallel ports power devices attached to them? Not to mention that you're comparing three different ports to a single, speedier port.
Now I'm not saying that a better spec couldn't be designed, but as long as the USB spec keeps getting speed increases, why would the average user require any other kind of plug?
To be fair to ME, when I installed ME on a computer that previously had 98 on it, I remember that something began working w/o issues that previously either was buggy or not working at all. Wish I could remember precisely what that was...
Also, it was a self-built computer with both 98 and ME coming from one of those college deals where they sell MS software are reduced prices (ridiculously reduced at the time, around $10 each. I hear it's greatly increased now, but still reduced compared to retail).
Are you telling me it is too expensive for my bank to store less than one megabyte per customer in order to offer 40 years of statements online?
Maybe from a privacy standpoint it is? I mean, couldn't a hacker do more damage to the bank's clients with 40 years of transaction history rather than just 18 months? Perhaps not, but I don't know for certain. Just a possibility.
It's the same thing as taking off your shirt in a public place.
No, it's not. I must admit that I am not familiar with the clothing of nursing mothers, but of the few public breastfeedings I have come across, the woman was still fairly clothed. I do not know how the garments were manufactured, but it was definitely in such a way that she was not required to remove her shirt from her body.
I think I agree with you about the picture though. Whether there's a kid, a nipple ring, body paint, or whatever else along with the breast, it does not matter. Unless you're using it in some sort of How-To guide to breastfeeding, it's just a picture of a breast.
Should Mom just not leave the house with little one or ignore his cries if he's hungry when she does? Hell, I'd go one step further. Anywhere it's legal for a male to go topless it should also be legal for women to do the same.
Just because someone does not wish to bare witness to breastfeeding in public, does not mean that they wish to put an end to it. I support top-free equality (breastfeeding included), but whenever I come across a public breastfeeding, I simply look away, because that is not my cup of coffee (tea be damned).
idiots who think the bill of rights applies to those accused of serious crimes.
That's sarcasm, right? Because the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, especially those accused of serious crimes.
Unless you didn't mean it like I read it, which is to say that how I read it opens up the possibility of claiming anything as a "serious crime" and denying anyone accused of committing that "serious crime" the proper due process of the law.
Considering it's only supposed to be ~5 billion years from now, I thought it more prudent to use millions rather than deal with fractions of billions.
And even if we are not the same bi-pedal, 46 chromosome species from now until eternity (I believe it is a possibility that we could remain relatively unchanged for as long as we desire), that does not change my point, which now that I am not dead-tired, I can re-iterate.
While it's certainly not something the average person needs to concern themselves with, at what point does something with such a guaranteed occurrence become something that we as a species should begin to spend any amount of time on? I'm not saying we need to spend any focus on it at this point in time. But it just seemed like you were implying there would never be a reason to need to leave this mudball.
Dinosaurs died out ~65 million years ago. Humans have only been on this mudball for ~10 thousand years. It may not happen within the next couple millennia, but it's ridiculous to say that just because it hasn't happened to us yet, it's not a threat to humanity's continued existence (not something to get worked up about by the average person, but definitely not something humanity as a whole should completely ignore).
And don't be such a pedant. The whole "dinosaurs died because they had no space program" thing was never meant to be taken literally. It's an allegory to precisely what you pointed out, adapting to a changing environment.:P
So tell me, how many millions of years must pass before the inevitable ballooning of our sun into a red giant becomes a reason to begin seeking ways to get ourselves off of this mudball?
Not saying you're lying, governments have been known to do stupid things, but putting the dye in taxed diesel does not make sense. It would mean I could buy the untaxed, cheaper stuff and add the dye myself at home.
how the hell do you tell when childhood ends and adulthood begins? And who gave YOU the right to draw the line?
The problem is that, from a governmental perspective, a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Children are not born into this world immediately possessing the knowledge and insight required to make certain decisions.
Certainly the line as it exists today is not perfect. After all, people do not all physically/mentally mature at the same rate/time. So the time at which one person's childhood ends (from a maturity perspective) may be years before another.
But without a line, we would have parents coddling their "children" well into their 30's, or on the opposite end of the spectrum, parents kicking their children out on the streets immediately after birth.
I may disagree with the placement of the line today, but I cannot think of a better solution. If you've got a better idea on solving the problem with lines, I'd love to hear it.
I don't remember the year, but back when The Screen Savers was still on TV, I remember them making a big deal out of the first time Amazon turned a profit for a quarter. Given that they were canceled in 2005, it had to have happened before then.
As long as they are not disrupting others, I do not see the issue.
It may not have been a cellphone, but back when I was in high school, I used to take out whatever novel I was reading at the time, and just read that for the duration of the class. And my teachers never bothered me about it. Why? Because I was not disrupting others. Because I got my work done regardless.
All wonderful jokes, but Xmas (in my mind at least) is the consumerism day, while Christmas represents the true, original spirit of the holiday, before corporations got their grubby little paws on everything.
There is a distinct difference between information as it pertains to knowledge about an individual, and information as it pertains to, say, a cosmological constant that anyone can figure out for themselves, as one example. The former should be protected, the latter is what should be available to all.
Mod parent up. When taken in conjunction with GP's post, this has got to be better than the million other Portal memes this story is bound to generate.
And that is the first problem we need to overcome. Every election, I proudly "throw my vote away" in the hopes that, maybe next time, more will join me. The first step to real change is believing that it is even possible.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd be more impressed if a visiting dignitary said "Such meager conditions for such a powerful man!" and our president said "I work for the American people and refuse to waste their money for my pleasure."
Except that in that scenario, would it really be a waste of money? The visiting dignitary is a guest of our nation after all. Is it not customary where you come from to "break out the good china" as I believe the saying goes, when you invite guests over?
The President is a manager, not a monarch.
I think he's a little bit of both (I'm not just referring to W. but to all Presidents). The President is not only the leader of our government, but also the head of state. Like it or not, he is the personification of The United States, both domestically and abroad.
In times of war, the POTUS is the Commander in Chief of our armed forces. In times of peace, an ambassador to other nations. And at all times, a check/balance on the power of the other two branches. Those are the only roles the POTUS should be playing.
That doesn't mean I think the POTUS should live a live of poverty. I agree that as an ambassador, certain excessive ceremonies need to be on display. But it just seemed like you were trying to give the executive branch more power than it should have with that statement.
For the record, I agree with you that there is little difference between an individual a few weeks prior to birth, up through weeks, months, or even years after birth. But House makes a good point IMO in this quote from One Day, One Room:
Patient: "Abortion is murder."
House: "True. It's a life and you should end it."
Patient: "Every life is sacred."
House: "Come on. Talk to me. Don't quote me bumper stickers."
Patient: "It's true."
House: "It's meaningless."
Patient: "It means that every life matters to God."
House: "Not to me. Not to you. Judging by the number of natural disasters, not to God either."
Patient: "You're just being argumentative."
House: "Yeah. I do do that. What about Hitler? Was his life sacred to God? Father of your child. Is his life sacred to you?"
Patient: "My child isn't Hitler."
House: "Either every life is sacred or-"
Patient: "Stop it! I don't want to chat about philosophy."
House: "You're not killing your rape baby because of a philosophy."
Patient: "It's murder. I'm against it. You for it?"
House: "Not as a general rule."
Patient: "Just for unborn children?"
House: "Yes. The problem with exceptions to rules is the line-drawing. It might make sense for us to kill the ass that did this to you. I mean, where do we draw the line? Which asses do we get to kill and which asses get to keep on being asses. The nice thing about the abortion debate is that we can quibble over trimesters but ultimately, there's a nice clean line: birth. Morally there isn't a lot of difference. Practically, huge."
It's a tricky subject to be sure. Just for the record, before I go into my diatribe, I am pro-choice.
At what point does a fetus begin to qualify? 15 weeks? 30? 40? Do they continue to remain unqualified for weeks, months, or even years after they've escaped the womb? After all, birth is just some arbitrary action, the creature within the womb became able to exit some time ago.
Again, I am pro-choice. This is just me playing Devil's Advocate.
Aren't PS/2 ports just for keyboards and mice? And could serial and parallel ports power devices attached to them? Not to mention that you're comparing three different ports to a single, speedier port.
Now I'm not saying that a better spec couldn't be designed, but as long as the USB spec keeps getting speed increases, why would the average user require any other kind of plug?
To be fair to ME, when I installed ME on a computer that previously had 98 on it, I remember that something began working w/o issues that previously either was buggy or not working at all. Wish I could remember precisely what that was...
Also, it was a self-built computer with both 98 and ME coming from one of those college deals where they sell MS software are reduced prices (ridiculously reduced at the time, around $10 each. I hear it's greatly increased now, but still reduced compared to retail).
Are you telling me it is too expensive for my bank to store less than one megabyte per customer in order to offer 40 years of statements online?
Maybe from a privacy standpoint it is? I mean, couldn't a hacker do more damage to the bank's clients with 40 years of transaction history rather than just 18 months? Perhaps not, but I don't know for certain. Just a possibility.
It's the same thing as taking off your shirt in a public place.
No, it's not. I must admit that I am not familiar with the clothing of nursing mothers, but of the few public breastfeedings I have come across, the woman was still fairly clothed. I do not know how the garments were manufactured, but it was definitely in such a way that she was not required to remove her shirt from her body.
I think I agree with you about the picture though. Whether there's a kid, a nipple ring, body paint, or whatever else along with the breast, it does not matter. Unless you're using it in some sort of How-To guide to breastfeeding, it's just a picture of a breast.
Should Mom just not leave the house with little one or ignore his cries if he's hungry when she does? Hell, I'd go one step further. Anywhere it's legal for a male to go topless it should also be legal for women to do the same.
Just because someone does not wish to bare witness to breastfeeding in public, does not mean that they wish to put an end to it. I support top-free equality (breastfeeding included), but whenever I come across a public breastfeeding, I simply look away, because that is not my cup of coffee (tea be damned).
idiots who think the bill of rights applies to those accused of serious crimes.
That's sarcasm, right? Because the Bill of Rights applies to everyone, especially those accused of serious crimes.
Unless you didn't mean it like I read it, which is to say that how I read it opens up the possibility of claiming anything as a "serious crime" and denying anyone accused of committing that "serious crime" the proper due process of the law.
do you want some BOY screwing your daughter?
Are you implying that they would be ok with it if it was another GIRL? ;)
Considering it's only supposed to be ~5 billion years from now, I thought it more prudent to use millions rather than deal with fractions of billions.
And even if we are not the same bi-pedal, 46 chromosome species from now until eternity (I believe it is a possibility that we could remain relatively unchanged for as long as we desire), that does not change my point, which now that I am not dead-tired, I can re-iterate.
While it's certainly not something the average person needs to concern themselves with, at what point does something with such a guaranteed occurrence become something that we as a species should begin to spend any amount of time on? I'm not saying we need to spend any focus on it at this point in time. But it just seemed like you were implying there would never be a reason to need to leave this mudball.
In fact, here they all are:
...
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaab
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaac
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZY
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Now I feel I must say that there is a bunch of garbage in there as well, but they can sort their own damn trash. Viva la QuatriÃme Amendement!
Dinosaurs died out ~65 million years ago. Humans have only been on this mudball for ~10 thousand years. It may not happen within the next couple millennia, but it's ridiculous to say that just because it hasn't happened to us yet, it's not a threat to humanity's continued existence (not something to get worked up about by the average person, but definitely not something humanity as a whole should completely ignore).
:P
And don't be such a pedant. The whole "dinosaurs died because they had no space program" thing was never meant to be taken literally. It's an allegory to precisely what you pointed out, adapting to a changing environment.
So tell me, how many millions of years must pass before the inevitable ballooning of our sun into a red giant becomes a reason to begin seeking ways to get ourselves off of this mudball?
Not saying you're lying, governments have been known to do stupid things, but putting the dye in taxed diesel does not make sense. It would mean I could buy the untaxed, cheaper stuff and add the dye myself at home.
how the hell do you tell when childhood ends and adulthood begins? And who gave YOU the right to draw the line?
The problem is that, from a governmental perspective, a line needs to be drawn somewhere. Children are not born into this world immediately possessing the knowledge and insight required to make certain decisions.
Certainly the line as it exists today is not perfect. After all, people do not all physically/mentally mature at the same rate/time. So the time at which one person's childhood ends (from a maturity perspective) may be years before another.
But without a line, we would have parents coddling their "children" well into their 30's, or on the opposite end of the spectrum, parents kicking their children out on the streets immediately after birth.
I may disagree with the placement of the line today, but I cannot think of a better solution. If you've got a better idea on solving the problem with lines, I'd love to hear it.
And for the record, I support all cartoon porn.
I don't remember the year, but back when The Screen Savers was still on TV, I remember them making a big deal out of the first time Amazon turned a profit for a quarter. Given that they were canceled in 2005, it had to have happened before then.
Citation please, I have never heard anything like this.
As long as they are not disrupting others, I do not see the issue.
It may not have been a cellphone, but back when I was in high school, I used to take out whatever novel I was reading at the time, and just read that for the duration of the class. And my teachers never bothered me about it. Why? Because I was not disrupting others. Because I got my work done regardless.
All wonderful jokes, but Xmas (in my mind at least) is the consumerism day, while Christmas represents the true, original spirit of the holiday, before corporations got their grubby little paws on everything.
There is a distinct difference between information as it pertains to knowledge about an individual, and information as it pertains to, say, a cosmological constant that anyone can figure out for themselves, as one example. The former should be protected, the latter is what should be available to all.
Mod parent up. When taken in conjunction with GP's post, this has got to be better than the million other Portal memes this story is bound to generate.
a choice between 2 candidates
And that is the first problem we need to overcome. Every election, I proudly "throw my vote away" in the hopes that, maybe next time, more will join me. The first step to real change is believing that it is even possible.
it's quite possible to build a small island in international water
It may be possible, but I think it would be much more practical to the average person to let nature create the island and you simply move on in ;)