Add to that the horrible instability, and then tell me why anyone should pursue this when the rewards offered are miniscule.
Same reason people become schoolteachers: Because it's fun and rewarding in itself. When I get home from staring at the computer all day, I turn on the computer to stare at it some more. I LOVE doing this! And people are willing to pay me for it. How cool is that?
I have strong communications abilities and the education so I could have been a lawyer out of undergrad. But then I found out my parents were married. That's another reason to be an engineer: People don't hate me because of my occupation.
Y'all have managed to do what certain syndicated cartoonists still think is impossible: Turn a web-only strip into a money-maker. So imagine you're talking to someone who is just starting out:
1. What do you feel are the key elements to having a successful web comic?
2. Do you feel that the barrier to entry is higher, lower or about the same today as they were when you started?
Well, you situation is curious. Why would only H1B's have the skills your company needs? Are the schools that train in it only in India? We cannot answer these questions based on the info you have given.
Well, first the disclaimer: We have no money right now, so we're not hiring today, but as soon as our next round of funding closes... we're gonna need more bodies, mostly in QA/Testing.
At the time we were hiring (right when the first round closed), what we mainly needed were people with Master's-level education or better, particularly in routing protocol development, wireless MAC development, etc. The main reason for that is because that's what we do -- we're a highly specialized company trying to develop something very specific; very few people have done it. That's one of the big three product differentiators according to The Great Marketer Herself: "Be First, Best or Different."
If you go to any typical university in America and look at the CS and EE grad schools, the first question you'll ask is: Where'z all the white people? They're not there. Why? They all went for Sociology or Philosophy or Law or some other dumbass useless degree. What you will see are eighteen gazillion Indians and (to quote my former professor who shall remain nameless) "The occasional chinaman."
Walter Sobchak: Also, dude, "chinaman" is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.
Anyway, that's it right there. There aren't very many locals going on to get their PhD or even their Master's in engineering fields. The ones who even bother with the engineering Bachelor's are running straight into industry; the ones who stick around for grad school aren't going into Engineering. Because we need that level of education in a specialized field to accomplish what we need to accomplish, that's what we ended up with.
And believe me... if we could have done it without having to sponsor any visas, we would have.
What companies like you want is "pump and dump" for cheap. It used to be there was a premium paid for faddish skills because of the lack of stability in them. But companies don't feel obligated to pay that premium anymore, and so want to pool the whole world for pump-and-dump workers on the cheap.
Oh, I guess you're right then.
So tell me... who should I pay a premium for that can do what we need to do? We'd love to hire him or her. We'd do it today, in fact, and get rid of these H1B's who have built our company from scratch. Yeah, that's it... we'll just ditch our dedicated, loyal and talented employees because there's someone better out there, who never interviewed with us, applied for the job, or even knocked on the door.
Sure! If someone better is out there at a "premium," by all means come by.
And pro-work-visa lobbyists, such as ITAA, still claim there is a "shortage" of IT people.
Because the tech industry changes so rapidly, skills that were valuable as recently as a year ago are no longer quite so useful. If a company is involved with a cutting-edge technology (like Wireless Mesh Networking) then finding people with the right skills is really difficult.
When we were looking for people to come work for us, we had a hell of a time finding people who had the necessary skills. We were not in a position to sponsor any visas, but in the end we had no choice but to do so. Slowly, we're converting our new hires one-by-one from their educational visas to H1B's.
I think the real issue here is that there is a shortage of qualified tech workers.
"But I spent $xx,xxx getting YYZ training!" Yes, and now we have no need for that training.
You do realize that this is the very attitude that caused the Democrats to lose in the first place?
Even the Democratic Leadership Council agrees: What happened?
While Democrats did made a strong negative case against Bush, we never conveyed a positive agenda for reform. Indeed, Democrats often reinforced the idea that the GOP was the "reform" party by trying to scare voters about every bad or deceptive Republican idea for changing government programs, instead of offering our own alternatives for reform. In the end, we relied on mobilizing voters who were hostile to Bush instead of persuading voters who were ambivalent about both parties, and about government. Since Republicans did have a simple, understandable message, it was an uneven contest: message plus mobilization will beat mobilization alone every time.
If we want our country back, first we stop looking at our countrymen as the enemy. We stop telling them they're wrong. If you want to end the hatre, stop hatin' and start lovin'.
I'm glad that people are inspecting the voting process with a microscope.
I would rather have the opposition win legitimately than for me to win "at all costs."
It is natural for the the people who lost to be upset. As long as they don't let it cloud their judgment, wring their hands and shout "I'm moving to Canada!" they're fine. Inspecting the electoral process is, at the least, a healthy way to deal with being upset about the election's results. The problems they find will help safeguard our rights in future elections, where the mistakes may favor a candidate I don't like.
So now that that's settled, there's something else you said I'd like to bring up.
"Move on." The message is good and it's a healthy attitude for the Loyal Opposition to take: Start working towards winning 2008. Start working towards keeping your interests protected without a representative in the White House. It's good advice.
Remember that the people who voted for Kerry truly believe they were right to do so, and have real misgivings about Bush. You may not agree with those misgivings. The point is not whether they are right or wrong; the point is that all sides believe they have legitimate reasons for believing what they believe. Saying "Get over it!" (from the Bush supporters) or "How can people be so stupid?" (from those who wanted Bush removed) is not useful; telling people they're idiots doesn't exactly help to win them to your point of view.
Give people the benefit of the doubt. We don't know it all, and neither do they. If we act like we don't know it all, it's a lot easier to have intelligent discussions, even with people who are not inclined to be reasonable.
The stoplights are wonderful. I visited Shanghai, Beijing and Qingdao (home of Tsingtao beer -- and damned fine beer, I might add) a couple of years ago, and the timed stoplights should be that way everywhere. When I was there, Shanghai didn't have the timers, and Beijing still had no lights at some major intersections, but Qingdao had the timed lights on every corner.
The trouble was that such lights are wasted on drivers in Qingdao. Let me tell you about the cab ride that went 65 mph going the wrong way down a one-way residential street. At the intersections, the stoplights were completely ignored. It doesn't matter if you know how long until the light changes if everyone goes through whenever they want to anyway!
At the lightless intersection in Beijing, it was interesting that in the absence of any overt management, people did a great job of communicating and sharing the road so that everyone was able to get to where they needed to without anyone hitting anyone else. In that light, I think they actually did better than they would have with a stoplight in place.
Now a careful reader might suspect that the organization I experienced at the un-lighted intersection in Beijing explains why the people in Qingdao ignored the stoplight. However, people who've been to Qingdao know better. Qingdao drivers are a different breed of animal from Beijing. If I had to pick the animal, I'd say a cat. Being chased. By a toddler with a water hose. After a direct hit.
Don't let that keep you out of Qingdao, though. Go in the Fall for the seafood and the beer. Oh, and the women (their bodies, not their accents).
First, be sure to assert the stupidity of the American people for doing this. Doing so clearly defines your superiority to the unwashed masses across the pond, and lets any Americans who may be paying attention (not that they would, anyway) who's the real boss.
Secondly, be sure to bring up some of Bush's failures in the past four years. In the most expensive and extensive campaigns in American history, many important issues -- such as Iraq and the Economy -- were completely ignored. It's important to make those facts known, as they help with again clearly defining your superiority; first you told them who's the boss, and now you've proven it!
Last, be sure to mention something about your future travel plans, such as where you're planning on taking a vacation and more importantly where you're not taking vacation. Better yet, welcome them to Europe with open arms. No one's really attached to their home anyway and want more than nothing else to find a better place to live; by demonstrating your superiority so clearly in the first two steps above, they know where they can go!
IMPORTANT: By no means allow anyone who voted for Bush attempt to explain it! No matter how irrational or idiotic their reasons are, you run the risk of understanding their motives, which could cause irreparable harm to your ideology! AVOID AVOID AVOID! If they attempt to speak, interrupt them or silence them quickly before you become contaminated! Remember that you're the boss here! Show them who is in charge!
By following these instructions, you will... oh, I see most of you already have. My mistake!
What's the diff?
on
The Cult of Mac
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
Then you are not a Mac User, your just happen to use a Mac.
If a Mac user is not someone who uses a Mac, then what is one?
I use an iBook for both my work stuff and my home stuff. I have an iPod. I got the free subscription to MacWorld. I have all of the accoutrements of the Mac User subculture.
I got the iBook because it does what I need it to do. Because it runs on top of BSD and GNU, I can get it to do a lot of other things. I got it because it revolves around my life. My life does not revolve around it.
In fact, it is that very thing that caused me to "switch." With my Windows box, I had to diligently upgrade it, monitor the many hardware components to make sure they were working together... I spent more time getting it to work than I spent working on it. My life revolved around the PC.
I dedicate as little time as possible to maintaining my Mac, and the question in my mind is always: What have you done for me lately? The day it stops serving me, I will drop it. This is not a lifestyle choice. This is merely: Do what I need done efficiently, or I'll find something else that can.
The Mac has been a better experience than the PC for me, but that has more to do with having the proper drivers and a pre-assembled machine than anything "Mac"-y about it. I might have had an equal experience buying an Inspiron or a Vaio if I used the OS as installed by the manufacturer.
"I thought that was the WHOLE POINT of RFID tags? Pretty useless if they need their own power source."
This is called Passive RFID. There is also Active RFID, where the tag has its own power source.
Active RFID is more expensive, because of the need for a power source, but it gets much better range than the ~10 feet (with an antenna that will cook you under perfect conditions) you can get with a passive tag.
Person-tracking RFID systems are the sorts of things that would use an active tag; you need greater range, and the tagged item has a much higher value than, say, a can of soup, so it's worth the extra cost.
As for the dream/nightmare of passive tags tracking people's purchase as they walk from store to store, I have enough trouble getting six tags placed directly onto an antenna powerful enough to make you feel warm if you stand next to it to get read; it's highly bloody unlikely that someone or some company with an antenna ten feet away is going to surreptitiously record your purchases without your knowledge. Don't believe the RFID industry's hype.
I thought my Palm was the greatest thing ever when I first got it. It was more convenient than a laptop, and my cell phone was bulky and lacked any features.
Now, I have a 12-inch iBook that can come with me almost everywhere I go; my $50 (with 1 year of T-mobile) cell phone, the tiny Sony Ericsson T610, has all of my contacts, my calendar, games, e-mail, stickies, and email, and can synchronize all of these with my laptop using Bluetooth.
The phone does the most important PDA functions and then some for less cost and in a smaller package; everything that needs computing power fits on the very small laptop.
It's not just that the phone is doing everything the PDA used to do; it's that the small, low-cost laptop can replace the PDA as a portable computing device and has enough power to be a reasonable desktop system as well.
There are still special-purpose apps that work best at the PDA level, such as tracking UPS deliveries. Outside of that niche, the PDA is all but dead.
Son of a bitch, my brain broke, and I hit the fucking "Submit" button anyway. The question she gave was, for them to give an example of changing their mind, not "When is it okay to change your mind?" I'm such a fucking loon.
"Nader used the hot-dog example to explain how it's perfectly okay to change one's mind when new facts come to light."
If you are right, then Nader, too, failed to answer the question. The question was, "When is it okay to change your mind?" Since the accusation of flip-flopping is used with issues more substantive than one's choice of lunchmeat, I assume the author is looking for just such an example.
I can give an example: I opposed our invasion of Yugoslavia. When I learned that the concentration camps and stories of horror were real, I changed my tune.
Kerry failed to give the obvious answer. Bush failed to give any answer. And Nader knows what he can do with those hot dogs he's not eating.
Off with their heads.
^--- (I'm putting text below this so that people know that I'm repeating this for emphasis, not a.sig.)
"It seems not unreasonable to me that if a product that many Americans consumed contained a substantial amount of carcinogens, that would be of national interest."
I don't believe the people who eat hot dogs, those who eat enough so that the number of carcinogens in hot dogs would have an effect on their health, make what they eat a priority.
I did. Kerry failed to introduce a specific instance of himself changing his mind. Nader was the only one who actually answered the question... but a hot dog? Why should I care what he thinks about hot dogs?
So we have one candidate failing to give a substantive answer, one who fails to answer the question, and a third who says nothing. It's the Marx brothers, folks: Groucho (Nader), Chico (Kerry), and Harpo (Bush).
I agree; if you're a Korean music retailer, it's a problem.
Now the sun will die out eventually, part of its natural progression. For those of us who rely on it for energy, this will be a problem. Sometime before then, we need to figure out how to get off this rock. Since we think its death will take a few million years, it's not our biggest concern yet. A natural decline of the middleman in music is a much more immediate concern.
The two concepts are not mutually exclusive; a natural progression can also be a problem.
SILENCE! How dare you suggest that the alternative may be just as bad, if not worse!
Everyone knows that the REPUBLICANS are to blame, and Kerry is the answer! I've heard that he also walks on water, and has been known to fast for seven days to replenish his ability to heal children.
ok sarcasm aside...
I don't understand the partisan sniping. Bush is bad, and Kerry is bad. Neither party cares about defending civil liberties any more. If anything, getting rid of Bush will accelerate the problem, because then people will let their guards down and tolerate more violations, like what happened during Clinton's second term! At least under Bush, people are acting concerned and fighting back.
...and it plays right into the hands of the satire:
"Barf? You look different." "No, see? I'm the same Barf I always was." *cut to scene from Spaceballs: The Movie with Barf replaced by poorly digitally edited-in New Barf where Old Barf used to be*:)
Slashdot Mirror
Add to that the horrible instability, and then tell me why anyone should pursue this when the rewards offered are miniscule.
Same reason people become schoolteachers: Because it's fun and rewarding in itself. When I get home from staring at the computer all day, I turn on the computer to stare at it some more. I LOVE doing this! And people are willing to pay me for it. How cool is that?
I have strong communications abilities and the education so I could have been a lawyer out of undergrad. But then I found out my parents were married. That's another reason to be an engineer: People don't hate me because of my occupation.
Y'all have managed to do what certain syndicated cartoonists still think is impossible: Turn a web-only strip into a money-maker. So imagine you're talking to someone who is just starting out:
1. What do you feel are the key elements to having a successful web comic?
2. Do you feel that the barrier to entry is higher, lower or about the same today as they were when you started?
Whatcha worried 'bout? Pickups are cheaper 'n' Porsches.
Like you're gonna be able to drive that little upside-down bathtub on the highways of Oklahoma... Sheeya right.
No money to spare. At the time, we had no product to sell and only a handful of employees. We're not exactly IBM here now, either.
Well, first the disclaimer: We have no money right now, so we're not hiring today, but as soon as our next round of funding closes... we're gonna need more bodies, mostly in QA/Testing.
At the time we were hiring (right when the first round closed), what we mainly needed were people with Master's-level education or better, particularly in routing protocol development, wireless MAC development, etc. The main reason for that is because that's what we do -- we're a highly specialized company trying to develop something very specific; very few people have done it. That's one of the big three product differentiators according to The Great Marketer Herself: "Be First, Best or Different."
If you go to any typical university in America and look at the CS and EE grad schools, the first question you'll ask is: Where'z all the white people? They're not there. Why? They all went for Sociology or Philosophy or Law or some other dumbass useless degree. What you will see are eighteen gazillion Indians and (to quote my former professor who shall remain nameless) "The occasional chinaman."
Walter Sobchak: Also, dude, "chinaman" is not the preferred nomenclature. Asian-American, please.
Anyway, that's it right there. There aren't very many locals going on to get their PhD or even their Master's in engineering fields. The ones who even bother with the engineering Bachelor's are running straight into industry; the ones who stick around for grad school aren't going into Engineering. Because we need that level of education in a specialized field to accomplish what we need to accomplish, that's what we ended up with.
And believe me... if we could have done it without having to sponsor any visas, we would have.
Oh, I guess you're right then.
So tell me... who should I pay a premium for that can do what we need to do? We'd love to hire him or her. We'd do it today, in fact, and get rid of these H1B's who have built our company from scratch. Yeah, that's it... we'll just ditch our dedicated, loyal and talented employees because there's someone better out there, who never interviewed with us, applied for the job, or even knocked on the door.
Sure! If someone better is out there at a "premium," by all means come by.
I'm serious.
Because the tech industry changes so rapidly, skills that were valuable as recently as a year ago are no longer quite so useful. If a company is involved with a cutting-edge technology (like Wireless Mesh Networking) then finding people with the right skills is really difficult.
When we were looking for people to come work for us, we had a hell of a time finding people who had the necessary skills. We were not in a position to sponsor any visas, but in the end we had no choice but to do so. Slowly, we're converting our new hires one-by-one from their educational visas to H1B's.
I think the real issue here is that there is a shortage of qualified tech workers.
"But I spent $xx,xxx getting YYZ training!" Yes, and now we have no need for that training.
Even the Democratic Leadership Council agrees:
What happened?
If we want our country back, first we stop looking at our countrymen as the enemy. We stop telling them they're wrong. If you want to end the hatre, stop hatin' and start lovin'.
I'm glad Bush won.
I'm glad that people are inspecting the voting process with a microscope.
I would rather have the opposition win legitimately than for me to win "at all costs."
It is natural for the the people who lost to be upset. As long as they don't let it cloud their judgment, wring their hands and shout "I'm moving to Canada!" they're fine. Inspecting the electoral process is, at the least, a healthy way to deal with being upset about the election's results. The problems they find will help safeguard our rights in future elections, where the mistakes may favor a candidate I don't like.
So now that that's settled, there's something else you said I'd like to bring up.
"Move on." The message is good and it's a healthy attitude for the Loyal Opposition to take: Start working towards winning 2008. Start working towards keeping your interests protected without a representative in the White House. It's good advice.
Remember that the people who voted for Kerry truly believe they were right to do so, and have real misgivings about Bush. You may not agree with those misgivings. The point is not whether they are right or wrong; the point is that all sides believe they have legitimate reasons for believing what they believe. Saying "Get over it!" (from the Bush supporters) or "How can people be so stupid?" (from those who wanted Bush removed) is not useful; telling people they're idiots doesn't exactly help to win them to your point of view.
Give people the benefit of the doubt. We don't know it all, and neither do they. If we act like we don't know it all, it's a lot easier to have intelligent discussions, even with people who are not inclined to be reasonable.
The stoplights are wonderful. I visited Shanghai, Beijing and Qingdao (home of Tsingtao beer -- and damned fine beer, I might add) a couple of years ago, and the timed stoplights should be that way everywhere. When I was there, Shanghai didn't have the timers, and Beijing still had no lights at some major intersections, but Qingdao had the timed lights on every corner.
The trouble was that such lights are wasted on drivers in Qingdao. Let me tell you about the cab ride that went 65 mph going the wrong way down a one-way residential street. At the intersections, the stoplights were completely ignored. It doesn't matter if you know how long until the light changes if everyone goes through whenever they want to anyway!
At the lightless intersection in Beijing, it was interesting that in the absence of any overt management, people did a great job of communicating and sharing the road so that everyone was able to get to where they needed to without anyone hitting anyone else. In that light, I think they actually did better than they would have with a stoplight in place.
Now a careful reader might suspect that the organization I experienced at the un-lighted intersection in Beijing explains why the people in Qingdao ignored the stoplight. However, people who've been to Qingdao know better. Qingdao drivers are a different breed of animal from Beijing. If I had to pick the animal, I'd say a cat. Being chased. By a toddler with a water hose. After a direct hit.
Don't let that keep you out of Qingdao, though. Go in the Fall for the seafood and the beer. Oh, and the women (their bodies, not their accents).
Man, I need to get back there sometime...
Maybe if we stop hating the rest of America, wounds can begin to heal?
It doesn't matter who started the fight. The point is, someone has to stop it, and if we really care, it should be us.
By the way... I think you'll find that the rest of America doesn't hate you nearly as much as you hate them.
First, be sure to assert the stupidity of the American people for doing this. Doing so clearly defines your superiority to the unwashed masses across the pond, and lets any Americans who may be paying attention (not that they would, anyway) who's the real boss.
Secondly, be sure to bring up some of Bush's failures in the past four years. In the most expensive and extensive campaigns in American history, many important issues -- such as Iraq and the Economy -- were completely ignored. It's important to make those facts known, as they help with again clearly defining your superiority; first you told them who's the boss, and now you've proven it!
Last, be sure to mention something about your future travel plans, such as where you're planning on taking a vacation and more importantly where you're not taking vacation. Better yet, welcome them to Europe with open arms. No one's really attached to their home anyway and want more than nothing else to find a better place to live; by demonstrating your superiority so clearly in the first two steps above, they know where they can go!
IMPORTANT: By no means allow anyone who voted for Bush attempt to explain it! No matter how irrational or idiotic their reasons are, you run the risk of understanding their motives, which could cause irreparable harm to your ideology! AVOID AVOID AVOID! If they attempt to speak, interrupt them or silence them quickly before you become contaminated! Remember that you're the boss here! Show them who is in charge!
By following these instructions, you will... oh, I see most of you already have. My mistake!
Then you are not a Mac User, your just happen to use a Mac.
If a Mac user is not someone who uses a Mac, then what is one?
I use an iBook for both my work stuff and my home stuff. I have an iPod. I got the free subscription to MacWorld. I have all of the accoutrements of the Mac User subculture.
I got the iBook because it does what I need it to do. Because it runs on top of BSD and GNU, I can get it to do a lot of other things. I got it because it revolves around my life. My life does not revolve around it.
In fact, it is that very thing that caused me to "switch." With my Windows box, I had to diligently upgrade it, monitor the many hardware components to make sure they were working together... I spent more time getting it to work than I spent working on it. My life revolved around the PC.
I dedicate as little time as possible to maintaining my Mac, and the question in my mind is always: What have you done for me lately? The day it stops serving me, I will drop it. This is not a lifestyle choice. This is merely: Do what I need done efficiently, or I'll find something else that can.
The Mac has been a better experience than the PC for me, but that has more to do with having the proper drivers and a pre-assembled machine than anything "Mac"-y about it. I might have had an equal experience buying an Inspiron or a Vaio if I used the OS as installed by the manufacturer.
"I thought that was the WHOLE POINT of RFID tags? Pretty useless if they need their own power source."
This is called Passive RFID. There is also Active RFID, where the tag has its own power source.
Active RFID is more expensive, because of the need for a power source, but it gets much better range than the ~10 feet (with an antenna that will cook you under perfect conditions) you can get with a passive tag.
Person-tracking RFID systems are the sorts of things that would use an active tag; you need greater range, and the tagged item has a much higher value than, say, a can of soup, so it's worth the extra cost.
As for the dream/nightmare of passive tags tracking people's purchase as they walk from store to store, I have enough trouble getting six tags placed directly onto an antenna powerful enough to make you feel warm if you stand next to it to get read; it's highly bloody unlikely that someone or some company with an antenna ten feet away is going to surreptitiously record your purchases without your knowledge. Don't believe the RFID industry's hype.
"So is a convention of commercial authors a..." ...great place to be a pickpocket?
Or better yet, kidnap 'em for ransom.
It reads to me like he's attacking the common misconceptions behind what makes a disruptive technology a disruptive technology.
This may be because he has those same misconceptions.
It may even be because Christensen has those same misconceptions.
I'm glad someone else mentioned it.
I thought my Palm was the greatest thing ever when I first got it. It was more convenient than a laptop, and my cell phone was bulky and lacked any features.
Now, I have a 12-inch iBook that can come with me almost everywhere I go; my $50 (with 1 year of T-mobile) cell phone, the tiny Sony Ericsson T610, has all of my contacts, my calendar, games, e-mail, stickies, and email, and can synchronize all of these with my laptop using Bluetooth.
The phone does the most important PDA functions and then some for less cost and in a smaller package; everything that needs computing power fits on the very small laptop.
It's not just that the phone is doing everything the PDA used to do; it's that the small, low-cost laptop can replace the PDA as a portable computing device and has enough power to be a reasonable desktop system as well.
There are still special-purpose apps that work best at the PDA level, such as tracking UPS deliveries. Outside of that niche, the PDA is all but dead.
Son of a bitch, my brain broke, and I hit the fucking "Submit" button anyway. The question she gave was, for them to give an example of changing their mind, not "When is it okay to change your mind?" I'm such a fucking loon.
Off with my head...
"Nader used the hot-dog example to explain how it's perfectly okay to change one's mind when new facts come to light."
.sig.)
If you are right, then Nader, too, failed to answer the question. The question was, "When is it okay to change your mind?" Since the accusation of flip-flopping is used with issues more substantive than one's choice of lunchmeat, I assume the author is looking for just such an example.
I can give an example: I opposed our invasion of Yugoslavia. When I learned that the concentration camps and stories of horror were real, I changed my tune.
Kerry failed to give the obvious answer. Bush failed to give any answer. And Nader knows what he can do with those hot dogs he's not eating.
Off with their heads.
^--- (I'm putting text below this so that people know that I'm repeating this for emphasis, not a
"It seems not unreasonable to me that if a product that many Americans consumed contained a substantial amount of carcinogens, that would be of national interest."
I don't believe the people who eat hot dogs, those who eat enough so that the number of carcinogens in hot dogs would have an effect on their health, make what they eat a priority.
No, no, no. Hitler was at least charismatic; people actually believed him when he made the Jews into terrorists. And he had that cute little mustache.
Darl is more like Mussolini.
I did. Kerry failed to introduce a specific instance of himself changing his mind. Nader was the only one who actually answered the question... but a hot dog? Why should I care what he thinks about hot dogs?
So we have one candidate failing to give a substantive answer, one who fails to answer the question, and a third who says nothing. It's the Marx brothers, folks: Groucho (Nader), Chico (Kerry), and Harpo (Bush).
Off with their heads.
I agree; if you're a Korean music retailer, it's a problem.
Now the sun will die out eventually, part of its natural progression. For those of us who rely on it for energy, this will be a problem. Sometime before then, we need to figure out how to get off this rock. Since we think its death will take a few million years, it's not our biggest concern yet. A natural decline of the middleman in music is a much more immediate concern.
The two concepts are not mutually exclusive; a natural progression can also be a problem.
SILENCE! How dare you suggest that the alternative may be just as bad, if not worse!
Everyone knows that the REPUBLICANS are to blame, and Kerry is the answer! I've heard that he also walks on water, and has been known to fast for seven days to replenish his ability to heal children.
ok sarcasm aside...
I don't understand the partisan sniping. Bush is bad, and Kerry is bad. Neither party cares about defending civil liberties any more. If anything, getting rid of Bush will accelerate the problem, because then people will let their guards down and tolerate more violations, like what happened during Clinton's second term! At least under Bush, people are acting concerned and fighting back.
...and it plays right into the hands of the satire:
:)
"Barf? You look different."
"No, see? I'm the same Barf I always was."
*cut to scene from Spaceballs: The Movie with Barf replaced by poorly digitally edited-in New Barf where Old Barf used to be*
Oh, and MadTV rocks.