Pornography (child-involved and otherwise) is often the excuse governments use for politically-based censorship. In fact pornography is exactly the Chinese excuse for censoring the Internet!
...the real fact-checking comes with other scientists try to duplicate the results. After all, Ross McKitrick's infamous degrees-for-radians paper slipped through the peer review process and was not caught until someone tried to duplicate his results and got the exact opposite conclusion.
Manipulative media, happy citizens who are staunchly nationalistic and xenophobic. Golly, that sounds so familiar, but I just can't put my finger on where I've encountered that before. I'm sure it'll come to me.
And yeah, I work for a community center where people are more interested in usability than anything else. If I told you half of what goes on here, your hair would stand on end.
If someone becomes addicted to these new e-cigs instead of the real thing, then good. The negative health effects of getting your nicotine jones from one of these "crutches" is substantially lower than the negative health effects of getting nicotine in one of the more normal ways.
Yes, at the end of the day the person is still addicted to nicotine and could still find themselves going back to cigarettes at some point, but that is always a danger with addiction, with or without the crutches. Either you never got addicted to nicotine, or you had an easier time quitting than most, because you don't seem to appreciate how difficult it is for most people to quit. It takes most people several tries to get it right, and Ozzy Osbourne once said it was harder for him to quit cigarettes than to quit heroin, yet you make it sound like it should be no more difficult than giving up a particular brand of coffee or a particular TV show.
So, because the evidence all points at one thing, and not your favorite fairy tale, everyone who decides to take the evidence seriously is claiming to "know everything"? Just because you willfully choose ignorance over evidence does not make everyone as addle-headed as you are.
Has living under socialism instead of freedom really been that great? Don't you miss having, I dunno, freedoms? I almost wish I were as ignorant as you so I could be happy in bondage also. Palin-Bachmann 2012! USA! USA!
PS -- when our Kenyan-born terrorist president starts nuking our own cities, don't say I didn't warn you!!!!11!1!!!1!oneone
The Soviets weren't communist any more than Republicans are libertarian. Communism was nothing more than rhetoric they used to whip up and manipulate the masses, but when you look at their actual actions, they're pretty much doing the exact opposite of what the rhetoric leads you to expect.
Hell, communists are more radical than libertarians (anarchy-wise). Libertarians believe in small national governments; communists want no national governments.
This CEO is smarter and harder working than you as evidenced by the fact that he makes more money than you. You think you know better than your betters? If there was anything wrong with what he said, the magic of the Free Market would have prevented him from saying it! If you want the nannystate to do everything for you, move to a communist country like Canada or Europe with all the other collectivist socialists!!!!!!11!1!1oneone [/conservative]
It is not possible to write a modern browser that is completely bug free and completely lacking in security holes. It sure is nice to wish that someone did make such a browser, but since browsers are written by human beings, I'll settle for browsers that are reasonably secure, reasonably bug-free, and frequently patched instead of complaining that none of them are perfect. Of course, if the post we're all responding to was made in jest, it was damned funny.
Lots of IT people have fallen on hard times since the dotcom bust, but we didn't turn to crime.
However, I wouldn't make any blanket statements about always blaming the criminal. What about people who live in countries with inadequate social services who steal bread to feed their kids? There are always circumstances in which it makes sense to blame the system rather than the criminal, but this is not one of them.
Who cares what conservatives think about any science-related program? Half of them believe the universe was created 10,000 years after the domestication of the dog and the other half think that global warming is a vast international conspiracy by 90% of the world's scientists that is either run from an obscure school in the UK or Al Gore's house depending on which one you ask.
Being at all concerned with what conservatives think about science is like asking a 4 year old with Down's Syndrome what he thinks about Keynesian economics.
I've heard all of the "evidence" for the existence of this or that magical sky faerie, and all of it is less credible than the evidence of people who claim to have been kidnapped by aliens and subjected to anal probes. Rejecting an idea that has zero evidence does not make one crazy.
On the other hand, believing in the Talking Snake Theory of Creation despite zero evidence for the Talking Snake Theory and despite massive amounts of evidence for evolution, big bang, etc., is very much insane.
The notion that corporations are people came from a lie. Some clerk altered the summary of a case that found (as all the cases before it) that corporations are not people to say that the court case found the opposite. Since then, many people read the summary without reading the whole thing. It cannot be stressed enough: the notion that corporations are people is a legal notion based on a lie. They are not people, and this ruling is yet another transfer of power from US citizens to the hands of large corporations, which is why conservatives and libertarians are defending it.
After all, why deal with all the uncomfortable responsibilities of living in a Democracy when we can just hand all power over to our corporate overlords and let them make all the decisions for us? It worked out so well on Wall Street, didn't it?
This wasn't a 40 year experiment. We had much the same thing going on in the late 1800s and early 1900s with much the same results. We didn't learn our lesson the previous two times, so I expect we won't learn our lesson this time either. In another few decades, the big corporations and big financial companies will whine that following the law is too hard and the sheeple will listen to them.
How long do you think it will be before all those buffet restaurants go out of business? Why do you think they and their customers have tolerated such an unfair pricing structure for so long?
Slashdot Mirror
And I hope Brazil's modernization goes well. The whole biofuel thing certainly raised interest outside of Brazil.
Pornography (child-involved and otherwise) is often the excuse governments use for politically-based censorship. In fact pornography is exactly the Chinese excuse for censoring the Internet!
You also have better beer, an obsession with some bizarre game that involves using a broom on ice, and the penchant for putting gravy on fries. ;)
In most movies, there is a clear victor, so by his argument doesn't this mean movies are not and can never be art?
...the real fact-checking comes with other scientists try to duplicate the results. After all, Ross McKitrick's infamous degrees-for-radians paper slipped through the peer review process and was not caught until someone tried to duplicate his results and got the exact opposite conclusion.
Manipulative media, happy citizens who are staunchly nationalistic and xenophobic. Golly, that sounds so familiar, but I just can't put my finger on where I've encountered that before. I'm sure it'll come to me.
And yeah, I work for a community center where people are more interested in usability than anything else. If I told you half of what goes on here, your hair would stand on end.
If someone becomes addicted to these new e-cigs instead of the real thing, then good. The negative health effects of getting your nicotine jones from one of these "crutches" is substantially lower than the negative health effects of getting nicotine in one of the more normal ways.
Yes, at the end of the day the person is still addicted to nicotine and could still find themselves going back to cigarettes at some point, but that is always a danger with addiction, with or without the crutches. Either you never got addicted to nicotine, or you had an easier time quitting than most, because you don't seem to appreciate how difficult it is for most people to quit. It takes most people several tries to get it right, and Ozzy Osbourne once said it was harder for him to quit cigarettes than to quit heroin, yet you make it sound like it should be no more difficult than giving up a particular brand of coffee or a particular TV show.
...is it that certain people get their panties in a twist over inter-racial marriages? What could possibly motivate such a bizarre aversion?
So, because the evidence all points at one thing, and not your favorite fairy tale, everyone who decides to take the evidence seriously is claiming to "know everything"? Just because you willfully choose ignorance over evidence does not make everyone as addle-headed as you are.
Has living under socialism instead of freedom really been that great? Don't you miss having, I dunno, freedoms? I almost wish I were as ignorant as you so I could be happy in bondage also. Palin-Bachmann 2012! USA! USA!
PS -- when our Kenyan-born terrorist president starts nuking our own cities, don't say I didn't warn you!!!!11!1!!!1!oneone
[/TEABAGGER]
The Soviets weren't communist any more than Republicans are libertarian. Communism was nothing more than rhetoric they used to whip up and manipulate the masses, but when you look at their actual actions, they're pretty much doing the exact opposite of what the rhetoric leads you to expect.
Hell, communists are more radical than libertarians (anarchy-wise). Libertarians believe in small national governments; communists want no national governments.
This CEO is smarter and harder working than you as evidenced by the fact that he makes more money than you. You think you know better than your betters? If there was anything wrong with what he said, the magic of the Free Market would have prevented him from saying it! If you want the nannystate to do everything for you, move to a communist country like Canada or Europe with all the other collectivist socialists!!!!!!11!1!1oneone [/conservative]
Or am I not understanding what they're proposing?
It is not possible to write a modern browser that is completely bug free and completely lacking in security holes. It sure is nice to wish that someone did make such a browser, but since browsers are written by human beings, I'll settle for browsers that are reasonably secure, reasonably bug-free, and frequently patched instead of complaining that none of them are perfect. Of course, if the post we're all responding to was made in jest, it was damned funny.
Lots of IT people have fallen on hard times since the dotcom bust, but we didn't turn to crime.
However, I wouldn't make any blanket statements about always blaming the criminal. What about people who live in countries with inadequate social services who steal bread to feed their kids? There are always circumstances in which it makes sense to blame the system rather than the criminal, but this is not one of them.
Who cares what conservatives think about any science-related program? Half of them believe the universe was created 10,000 years after the domestication of the dog and the other half think that global warming is a vast international conspiracy by 90% of the world's scientists that is either run from an obscure school in the UK or Al Gore's house depending on which one you ask.
Being at all concerned with what conservatives think about science is like asking a 4 year old with Down's Syndrome what he thinks about Keynesian economics.
And why do you love the terrorists so much? FOX News warned me about people like you! [/teabagger]
I've heard all of the "evidence" for the existence of this or that magical sky faerie, and all of it is less credible than the evidence of people who claim to have been kidnapped by aliens and subjected to anal probes. Rejecting an idea that has zero evidence does not make one crazy.
On the other hand, believing in the Talking Snake Theory of Creation despite zero evidence for the Talking Snake Theory and despite massive amounts of evidence for evolution, big bang, etc., is very much insane.
Not a snail, a sea slug: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34824610/ns/technology_and_science-science/?GT1=43001 And yeah, this was the second thing I thought of when "horizontal gene" was brought up (mitochondria being the first).
The notion that corporations are people came from a lie. Some clerk altered the summary of a case that found (as all the cases before it) that corporations are not people to say that the court case found the opposite. Since then, many people read the summary without reading the whole thing. It cannot be stressed enough: the notion that corporations are people is a legal notion based on a lie. They are not people, and this ruling is yet another transfer of power from US citizens to the hands of large corporations, which is why conservatives and libertarians are defending it.
After all, why deal with all the uncomfortable responsibilities of living in a Democracy when we can just hand all power over to our corporate overlords and let them make all the decisions for us? It worked out so well on Wall Street, didn't it?
How does one go about "ceasing" assets? Do you rub them out with a giant pencil eraser? Or did you mean "seize" their assets? :P
Yep. The purpose of DRM is to punish legitimate customers.
This wasn't a 40 year experiment. We had much the same thing going on in the late 1800s and early 1900s with much the same results. We didn't learn our lesson the previous two times, so I expect we won't learn our lesson this time either. In another few decades, the big corporations and big financial companies will whine that following the law is too hard and the sheeple will listen to them.
How long do you think it will be before all those buffet restaurants go out of business? Why do you think they and their customers have tolerated such an unfair pricing structure for so long?