The ONLY reason this would get my panties in a bunch would be if the ads interfer with my fast forward timing. I have gotten rather good at identiying the end of the comercials and hitting play perfectly to get back to the show without having to rewind/fastforward more etc...
Yea, this seems much better than the fear I have of banner ads during the show. I have noticed this on several stations already mostly to advertise other shows. But things like discovery and scifi both while watching a show there will be some distracting advertisement run across the bottom of the screen for another show coming on later. How long before this is used for product and service advertisements?
Uhh, they do. Every time I boot my system I get a Tyan motherboard advertisement, an AMD advertisement, then a quick Nvidia advertisement (actually I was able to turn this off with the NoLogo option), as it boots I get a grub advertisement, then a Linux kernel advertisement. Once I log in there is a big Debian advertisement. Hell sitting her at work there is a big DELL advertisement just below the screen on my monitor and another in the upper left section of my keyboard and another on my mouse. Even my stapler has a big Swingline written in a nice cursive font across the top. Sure these are non intrusive. During boot and Post it almost looks like it is part of what needs to be done.
Cable companies aren't as bad as the satellite companies. They bombard my home and property with radiation 24 hours a day 7 days a week yet charge me for looking at it, and have made it illegal for me to do anything with it without giving them money.
How do we make a voter verification process then that is only verifiable by the voter and not by a 3rd party? If a 3rd party can verify a vote than voting is no longer fair for two main reasons:
Someone can be bullied into voting s certain way. eg. A Liberal wife married to a conservative husband could be bullied into voting against her wishes. Where as now she can vote for whom ever she wants.
Votes can be bought. Whether this is worth it or not if someone can open up a stand that says "Will buy vote verifications for candidate X for $5." It would sway the vote. This could be done as simply as a spam email that has a rumor of a way to cash in vote verifications after the election.
Of course without voter verification we have the ability to lose paper votes or have dead people voting etc...
yea because at least paper trails are not curreuptable and 100% accurate at all times.
It is strange to me that Slashdot of all places prefers a dead tree format to a technical one. Both are going to be able to be fixed. Both sides of the big government federlist party will sway it pretty much evenly so we still have a mostly fair election.
Another small missrepresintation of the stormtrooper.
*)Stormtroopers cant shoot.
but what evedence is there that stormtroopers actually can shoot. Well, if we start with the comment from Ben "...These blast points are too accurate for sand people, only emperial stormtroopers are so precise." This shows that Ben knows that stormtroopers are very good shots. But you say "Duiring the dethstar sceen stormtroopers couldn't hit crap!!!" But if you pay attention the the entire portion of the film they were ordered not to. A tracking device was placed on Han's ship and they were allowed to escape. Moff Tarkin told Dart Vader "I'm taking an awful risk Vader, this had better work." Explains why they we not hitting anything at that time.
Just to add one more thing, minimum wage increases only help people making between the old and new minimum wage, and only for a short time. It hurts anyone already making more than the new minimum wage and it drives cost of living up across the board.
Other than the stimulation of the economy it hurts everyone that doesn't get a raise in line with the minimum wage increase.
This is why conspiracy theories don't scale. The more people involved, the more people there are likely to turn in on moral, financial, attention or other grounds.
Just noticed a post a little lower down that had the numbers quoted from the poll. I was off by a quite a bit and it was really AS and BS degrees for Bush all others for Kerry by a much smaller margine than i posted.
A poll on CNN seems to support your argument to a pretty good degree. I don't remember the exact link but it showed that people with a BS supported bush something like 75%-25% where as all other education levels higher and lower supported Kerry 60%-40%. The numbers I did were ruff estimates of what I seem to remember not the exact numbers I don't remember where the poll was.
The only "real" argument for a minimum wage law I have come up with has to do with economics as a whole rather than giving poor people a hand out. We have to look at the reason inflation is necessary for economic growth.
First if money is deflated in value then people with money don't have to do anything at all. The more money they have the more money they get just by holding onto it. No reason to invest in anything because your money is just gaining value. This is bad because only rich people will have money. Poor will not be able to have a job because of no investment.
If money stays the same value all the time you end up with a lesser extreme of the above scenario. There will be a small amount of investment but because $1,000,000 is always going to be worth that much there is no hurry.
With a small steady inflation rate it will help keep the economy moving. It will help rich people move money out of bank savings accounts and into corporate investment and stock markets. It will help people obtain jobs and continue to grow the general economy. Money is only really worth something when it is spent.
Back to minimum wage. A way for government to control inflation is through a minimum wage. Slowly growing what the lowest paying job is will have the effect of raising prices to match, witch will raise profit (numerically not value wise), it will stir up the economy and keep things moving.
While a college degree is not a guarantee of intelligence I would say any given random sample of college educated people would have a higher average intelligence that then a similar sample of non college graduates. Sure there are stupid MBAs and Phds and smart High School dropouts, but they are the exception, not the rule.
Here are some of the examples from some of the comparison sites between Bush and Kerry's stance on things that I think are way to socilist for my taste:
Kerry supports:
-Supports affirmative action programs in the workplace and university admissions. (Socalist idea of job assignment)
-Opposes private school vouchers, fearing it will drain funds from public schools. (keep education as a government social service)
-Proposes to increase early childhood programs such as Head Start and fully fund special-needs education. (more education socialization)
-Supports raising gas mileage standards for passenger vehicles. (dictating what I want in a vehicle)
-Proposes to spend about $76 billion annually on large health care programs. (socalizeing the medical system. we have clear examples of how bad this turns out)
-Allow private citizens to obtain "affordable" health care through federal employee insurance systems via subsidies and tax credits. (do I need an explination?)
-Opposes privatizing Social Security.
-Proposes $50 billion for job creation and economic stimulus programs.
These are all equivilant of stealing money from me to give to someone else.
In the immortal words of Bush "I don't remember saying that, I think it is what they call an exaggeration." Other than saying it takes longer to build up 8 years of downsizing then the 21 months he had, which he didn't use to rebuild like he should have, I don't think I really was trying to support Bush. I mentioned two specific things about Clinton that he did that are causing real problems here and now. I didn't mention Bush, I didn't even really elude to supporting Bush. You seem to be the one that read that into it.
"Republicans have the power now, they have the responsibility that comes with that power. It would be a joy if they actually accepted the responsibility and not just the power for a change."
Again you are right. I'm somewhere between a South Park Republican and libertarian. I don't trust either Republicans or Democrats, but I really don't want anything to do with the Democrats socialist platform. While I can almost deal with the Republican platform I don't think the current administration represents it very well. Like I said in one post above, I am voting libertarian but hope for a Bush win. I can always fight to get my rights back, I wont be able to get a burnt down ranch back.
Typically Libertarians don't so much tell you what you can or can't do but what you should expect to not have happen to you.
Rather than saying that you can't kill people, you are given the right not to be killed. Again rather than not being allowed to steal you have the right to not have property taken. While worded in a positive manor this is what the bill of rights and declaration of independence was originally written to be.
Hey, your right, for the most part. The only thing I wonder about is the equipment. HMMWVs were never really armored from the beginning. Flack jackets were never made for everyone and were always special issue. The M16s they have are not like the A1s used in Vietnam as some seem to claim. the M16 A2s and A3s are both very reliable as well as the SAW and M60s that are carried by ground troops. To say that you can drop a billion dollars and suddenly everything should be fixed is a democrats dream of money fixes everything and the government has the money to support me for everything.
Bush is suppose to have friends in the military supply chain why hasn't he offered them a big contract to do all these things and fix these problems? You don't think someone wants to supply all the troops with a $30 flack jacket and sell it to the us army for $200? That would be the easiest pork to sell to everyone. Sorry but the logistics are just to large to actually be able to pull it off. The infrastructure was never there, before during or after Clinton.
"Sorry but the Republicans have been in power for 4 years now"
Sorry, but they didn't have 4 years to build up a defense, The 9/11/01 attacks took all the resources for building back and spent it on actually doing something. Even Clinton said we needed to go to Iraq, I don't think we did but then I don't think we need to have a large world wide presents of military at all, unlike the Democrats and Republicans, but of course Clinton knew that our military wasn't ready for a ground war cause he dismantled it. The treat was still there.
I'm sorry but defending the Democrats by pointing at the bad that the Republicans have done is just not going to convince me of anything. That kind of pointing goes both ways.
Slashdot Mirror
The ONLY reason this would get my panties in a bunch would be if the ads interfer with my fast forward timing. I have gotten rather good at identiying the end of the comercials and hitting play perfectly to get back to the show without having to rewind/fastforward more etc...
Otherwise ad away Tivo!
Funny, I've had my Tivo for years now and haven't signed a single contract with Tivo. Guess I'm one who can complain about this.
Yea, this seems much better than the fear I have of banner ads during the show. I have noticed this on several stations already mostly to advertise other shows. But things like discovery and scifi both while watching a show there will be some distracting advertisement run across the bottom of the screen for another show coming on later. How long before this is used for product and service advertisements?
Uhh, they do. Every time I boot my system I get a Tyan motherboard advertisement, an AMD advertisement, then a quick Nvidia advertisement (actually I was able to turn this off with the NoLogo option), as it boots I get a grub advertisement, then a Linux kernel advertisement. Once I log in there is a big Debian advertisement. Hell sitting her at work there is a big DELL advertisement just below the screen on my monitor and another in the upper left section of my keyboard and another on my mouse. Even my stapler has a big Swingline written in a nice cursive font across the top. Sure these are non intrusive. During boot and Post it almost looks like it is part of what needs to be done.
Cable companies aren't as bad as the satellite companies. They bombard my home and property with radiation 24 hours a day 7 days a week yet charge me for looking at it, and have made it illegal for me to do anything with it without giving them money.
Of course without voter verification we have the ability to lose paper votes or have dead people voting etc...
So do you have an idea on how to fix this?
yea because at least paper trails are not curreuptable and 100% accurate at all times.
It is strange to me that Slashdot of all places prefers a dead tree format to a technical one. Both are going to be able to be fixed. Both sides of the big government federlist party will sway it pretty much evenly so we still have a mostly fair election.
hehe, reminds me of the porno reviewer from, was it "Saturday night live"???
It started slow. Then it got a little better. Next it got much better. Then I got really into it. Then I lost interest.
Really? I noticed that the first 3-5 ads were pretty good then I just sort of lost interest?
I'll be in my bunk...
Debian GNU/Solaris
The plural of sheep is lego in Europe? You guys are wierd.
Wow, your Toy'R'Us sux. Hell even the overpriced grocery stores I check out their sets have more than 10 pieces and are under $5.
Another small missrepresintation of the stormtrooper.
*)Stormtroopers cant shoot.
but what evedence is there that stormtroopers actually can shoot. Well, if we start with the comment from Ben "...These blast points are too accurate for sand people, only emperial stormtroopers are so precise." This shows that Ben knows that stormtroopers are very good shots. But you say "Duiring the dethstar sceen stormtroopers couldn't hit crap!!!" But if you pay attention the the entire portion of the film they were ordered not to. A tracking device was placed on Han's ship and they were allowed to escape. Moff Tarkin told Dart Vader "I'm taking an awful risk Vader, this had better work." Explains why they we not hitting anything at that time.
The Stormtroopers and Tie pilots were the good guys. They were just fighting the terrorist rebel scum.
Just to add one more thing, minimum wage increases only help people making between the old and new minimum wage, and only for a short time. It hurts anyone already making more than the new minimum wage and it drives cost of living up across the board.
Other than the stimulation of the economy it hurts everyone that doesn't get a raise in line with the minimum wage increase.
This is why conspiracy theories don't scale. The more people involved, the more people there are likely to turn in on moral, financial, attention or other grounds.
Just noticed a post a little lower down that had the numbers quoted from the poll. I was off by a quite a bit and it was really AS and BS degrees for Bush all others for Kerry by a much smaller margine than i posted.
Sorry
A poll on CNN seems to support your argument to a pretty good degree. I don't remember the exact link but it showed that people with a BS supported bush something like 75%-25% where as all other education levels higher and lower supported Kerry 60%-40%. The numbers I did were ruff estimates of what I seem to remember not the exact numbers I don't remember where the poll was.
The only "real" argument for a minimum wage law I have come up with has to do with economics as a whole rather than giving poor people a hand out. We have to look at the reason inflation is necessary for economic growth.
First if money is deflated in value then people with money don't have to do anything at all. The more money they have the more money they get just by holding onto it. No reason to invest in anything because your money is just gaining value. This is bad because only rich people will have money. Poor will not be able to have a job because of no investment.
If money stays the same value all the time you end up with a lesser extreme of the above scenario. There will be a small amount of investment but because $1,000,000 is always going to be worth that much there is no hurry.
With a small steady inflation rate it will help keep the economy moving. It will help rich people move money out of bank savings accounts and into corporate investment and stock markets. It will help people obtain jobs and continue to grow the general economy. Money is only really worth something when it is spent.
Back to minimum wage. A way for government to control inflation is through a minimum wage. Slowly growing what the lowest paying job is will have the effect of raising prices to match, witch will raise profit (numerically not value wise), it will stir up the economy and keep things moving.
While a college degree is not a guarantee of intelligence I would say any given random sample of college educated people would have a higher average intelligence that then a similar sample of non college graduates. Sure there are stupid MBAs and Phds and smart High School dropouts, but they are the exception, not the rule.
Here are some of the examples from some of the comparison sites between Bush and Kerry's stance on things that I think are way to socilist for my taste:
Kerry supports:
-Supports affirmative action programs in the workplace and university admissions. (Socalist idea of job assignment)
-Opposes private school vouchers, fearing it will drain funds from public schools. (keep education as a government social service)
-Proposes to increase early childhood programs such as Head Start and fully fund special-needs education. (more education socialization)
-Supports raising gas mileage standards for passenger vehicles. (dictating what I want in a vehicle)
-Proposes to spend about $76 billion annually on large health care programs. (socalizeing the medical system. we have clear examples of how bad this turns out)
-Allow private citizens to obtain "affordable" health care through federal employee insurance systems via subsidies and tax credits. (do I need an explination?)
-Opposes privatizing Social Security.
-Proposes $50 billion for job creation and economic stimulus programs.
These are all equivilant of stealing money from me to give to someone else.
In the immortal words of Bush "I don't remember saying that, I think it is what they call an exaggeration." Other than saying it takes longer to build up 8 years of downsizing then the 21 months he had, which he didn't use to rebuild like he should have, I don't think I really was trying to support Bush. I mentioned two specific things about Clinton that he did that are causing real problems here and now. I didn't mention Bush, I didn't even really elude to supporting Bush. You seem to be the one that read that into it.
"Republicans have the power now, they have the responsibility that comes with that power. It would be a joy if they actually accepted the responsibility and not just the power for a change."
Again you are right. I'm somewhere between a South Park Republican and libertarian. I don't trust either Republicans or Democrats, but I really don't want anything to do with the Democrats socialist platform. While I can almost deal with the Republican platform I don't think the current administration represents it very well. Like I said in one post above, I am voting libertarian but hope for a Bush win. I can always fight to get my rights back, I wont be able to get a burnt down ranch back.
Typically Libertarians don't so much tell you what you can or can't do but what you should expect to not have happen to you.
Rather than saying that you can't kill people, you are given the right not to be killed. Again rather than not being allowed to steal you have the right to not have property taken. While worded in a positive manor this is what the bill of rights and declaration of independence was originally written to be.
Hey, your right, for the most part. The only thing I wonder about is the equipment. HMMWVs were never really armored from the beginning. Flack jackets were never made for everyone and were always special issue. The M16s they have are not like the A1s used in Vietnam as some seem to claim. the M16 A2s and A3s are both very reliable as well as the SAW and M60s that are carried by ground troops. To say that you can drop a billion dollars and suddenly everything should be fixed is a democrats dream of money fixes everything and the government has the money to support me for everything.
Bush is suppose to have friends in the military supply chain why hasn't he offered them a big contract to do all these things and fix these problems? You don't think someone wants to supply all the troops with a $30 flack jacket and sell it to the us army for $200? That would be the easiest pork to sell to everyone. Sorry but the logistics are just to large to actually be able to pull it off. The infrastructure was never there, before during or after Clinton.
"Sorry but the Republicans have been in power for 4 years now"
Sorry, but they didn't have 4 years to build up a defense, The 9/11/01 attacks took all the resources for building back and spent it on actually doing something. Even Clinton said we needed to go to Iraq, I don't think we did but then I don't think we need to have a large world wide presents of military at all, unlike the Democrats and Republicans, but of course Clinton knew that our military wasn't ready for a ground war cause he dismantled it. The treat was still there.
I'm sorry but defending the Democrats by pointing at the bad that the Republicans have done is just not going to convince me of anything. That kind of pointing goes both ways.