"The reality of the professional working world is the Mac is eye candy, and only useful for performing work the same way a cooper mini is useful for hauling lumber. It's compact and cute, but don't expect to move much in it. "
And by the way, I should point out that while that might have been true 10 years ago, it simply isn't today. Today, the majority of software developers -- the overall majority, that is, including those who develop Windows programs -- do it on a Mac. Look it up. It was professionals who led the switch to Macs. And that means that you are simply wrong. Apples have a lot to offer... if you know what you're doing.
"Look it up"? Sorry, you put forth the claim, you need to put forth the evidence.
Hitler ran for government just like all the others and after he was elected it was too late. I doubt very much that "hate speech" laws (like there are in the US as well) would have prevented his election and so therefore would not have prevented his Final Solution from being implemented.
Sure they do. What I'm arguing against -- what I find to be incredulous, really -- is the idea that the deaths of over six million people was pretty much down to one person's freedom of speech. We have documented evidence that it took literally years of meticulous planning by dozens or hundreds of people to carry out that vile plan. Hitler's speeches and demagoguery helped, surely, but I find it baffling to essentially make the argument that if Hitler's freedom of speech were curtailed he wouldn't have done what he ended up doing.
What do we do to find the law to be 'monstrous and shocking'? What is the process for finding the legislature and DoJ to be 'monstrous and shocking'? For finding that they do not derive their just powers from the will of the governed and have violated their sworn duty to The Constitution in favor of their sponsors' will-to-power?
I just now saw your post. Please read my earlier post on jury nullification.
It's nothing to do with intelligence, per se. It's simply that they don't realize that they have the power to do anything in the first place.
Hint: it's called "jury nullification" and it's the thing that must never be talked about openly or it'll give the judge an aneurysm and he'll declare a mistrial. It's the thing that'll get you thrown out during voir dire faster than if you showed up at the courthouse with a KKK hood and robe on.
Jury nullification is a vital part of the checks and balances on the power of government and has been steadily eroded along with many of our other vital rights and responsibilities.
See, the judge instructs the jury that if this woman has met all the elements of the crime, then she should be found liable and she should pay whatever the statute declares and/or whatever the plaintiff can justify. Jury nullification says, "yeah, she's guilty of filesharing, but we don't care to have her punished for it as we don't see it as being punishment-worthy in this case. Sorry, plaintiff didn't meet the burden of proof, not guilty. See ya, bye."
There are mandates that are passed all the time in our own government that the populist support isn't necessary. I'd argue it was the same at that time. Populist support was not crucial and again, it ignores the work done by dozens or even hundreds of people behind the scenes.
No, his use and abuse of the military hierarchy made the holocaust possible. His use and abuse of the scientific process (testing of Zyklon-B for example and other studies which tortured or killed people) made the holocaust possible.
It's like saying Bush was a powerful orator whose freedom of speech got us involved in the Iraq war. It doesn't take into consideration all the time, effort and resources that the rest of the government and soldiers spent in bringing it about.
Historically, it has been borne out that not all of the high-ranking decision makers agreed with Hitler on his Final Solution of eradicating Jews and other "undesirables", yet they still carried out his orders for reasons which had absolutely nothing to do with that dictator's "freedom of speech."
Britain should know better than to ask for such an idiotic thing in the first place.
Well, no actually. You're assuming that British people study the US constitution - they don't.
I also don't assume American people study the British laws -- but I expect our diplomats and heads of state to know at least the tiniest iota of the country's laws that we're trying to deal with before making rather ridiculous requests.
You're seriously conflating one man's speech (speaking) to the actual military orders that he issued to tens of thousands of German politicians, military generals, soldiers, and Nazi sympathizers who carried out those orders over months and years of dedicated extermination?
I hope they don't find the bodies that I buried on my Farmville.
"Yes, your honor, we not only have a confession from Mr. Interoperable about his multiple murders, but we have conclusive proof of his Wars with the Mafia."
Ok, so they chose to leave the male end sticking out of the wall- and instead of using some sort of extension cord plug the laptop directly in.
Oh, is that how they're doing it? I figured that they'd simply tape a huge, ugly plastic flower to it like they do with pens in banks and grocery stores so that you can use it freely but then you can't claim you "accidentally" walked off with it.
>The judge is an idiot and not fit to sit the bench.
The judge is smart enough to realize that a lawsuit against the kid will open up the woman's medical records to the court, and will demand testimony from the doctor who treated her, and who presumably didn't do everything possible to save her life. She didn't bleed out on the street under the kid's bike. She died after months of (mis)treatment by a quack. I think that's an important element to this story that's being overlooked because of the sensational nature of the child being sued.
You've said this like six times already in this thread and I frankly think it needs to be said six more. Of course, even if true (which the more I think about it, you're right), it still does not excuse the plaintiff's attorneys from being scummy by putting this child and her family through this legal wringer just so they can get to the doctors and doctors' insurance companies.
The difference is that Texans and New Yorkers speak approximately the same language, whereas Americans would need to converse with their politicians in a foreign language, most likely English.
You made a blanket statement that "...you could walk away from Verizon at any point..." which is true but considering the vast majority of cell phone users do have contracts, this walking away also has a steep cost. Exactly as is planned and counted upon by Verizon and all the other cell phone companies.
Also, even though it's been deemed legal, I think the elements of "meeting of the minds" and "undue influence" should be revisited in relation to contract law and cell phone companies. More and more, I believe that there is no equal footing when it comes to these kinds of contracts (which also applies to employment, but that's a subject for a different thread).
If you noticed on the new Star Trek movie, the Vulcan "school" consisted of hemispherical depressions in which students were forced to stand while being bombarded with questions. Lets do that.
Actually, the school that was featured in Serenity would probably be far better as was mentioned upthread by several posters: sitting on a comfortable mat on the floor with desks at a proper height, outdoors (in good weather) AND their cool futuristic iPads. Everyone wins! Well, except in *my* version of this Utopia, all the students' computers would be running some flavor of Linux.
and seeing these lists of small fees added on to all my bills, feeling really helpless.
A business attaching fees to your invoices is all it takes to make you feel "really helpless"? You know you could walk away from Verizon Wireless anytime you want, right? Wireless service is hardly a matter of life and death....
Yup, and pay a $400 early termination fee. Man, that'll really teach Verizon a lesson!
Slashdot Mirror
Well, that insightful reasoning completely convinced me! Thank you for the mini-debate and I wish you well.
"The reality of the professional working world is the Mac is eye candy, and only useful for performing work the same way a cooper mini is useful for hauling lumber. It's compact and cute, but don't expect to move much in it. "
And by the way, I should point out that while that might have been true 10 years ago, it simply isn't today. Today, the majority of software developers -- the overall majority, that is, including those who develop Windows programs -- do it on a Mac. Look it up. It was professionals who led the switch to Macs. And that means that you are simply wrong. Apples have a lot to offer... if you know what you're doing.
"Look it up"? Sorry, you put forth the claim, you need to put forth the evidence.
And X equals what, exactly, in your case so that we can have some actual numbers to help better understand his and your point of view?
Hitler ran for government just like all the others and after he was elected it was too late. I doubt very much that "hate speech" laws (like there are in the US as well) would have prevented his election and so therefore would not have prevented his Final Solution from being implemented.
...viewing TFA caused a Flash popover ad to appear over the article text. Just sayin'.
Yeah, that's okay, I still have just enough battery left to fini
Sure they do. What I'm arguing against -- what I find to be incredulous, really -- is the idea that the deaths of over six million people was pretty much down to one person's freedom of speech. We have documented evidence that it took literally years of meticulous planning by dozens or hundreds of people to carry out that vile plan. Hitler's speeches and demagoguery helped, surely, but I find it baffling to essentially make the argument that if Hitler's freedom of speech were curtailed he wouldn't have done what he ended up doing.
What do we do to find the law to be 'monstrous and shocking'? What is the process for finding the legislature and DoJ to be 'monstrous and shocking'? For finding that they do not derive their just powers from the will of the governed and have violated their sworn duty to The Constitution in favor of their sponsors' will-to-power?
I just now saw your post. Please read my earlier post on jury nullification.
It's nothing to do with intelligence, per se. It's simply that they don't realize that they have the power to do anything in the first place.
Hint: it's called "jury nullification" and it's the thing that must never be talked about openly or it'll give the judge an aneurysm and he'll declare a mistrial. It's the thing that'll get you thrown out during voir dire faster than if you showed up at the courthouse with a KKK hood and robe on.
Jury nullification is a vital part of the checks and balances on the power of government and has been steadily eroded along with many of our other vital rights and responsibilities.
See, the judge instructs the jury that if this woman has met all the elements of the crime, then she should be found liable and she should pay whatever the statute declares and/or whatever the plaintiff can justify. Jury nullification says, "yeah, she's guilty of filesharing, but we don't care to have her punished for it as we don't see it as being punishment-worthy in this case. Sorry, plaintiff didn't meet the burden of proof, not guilty. See ya, bye."
Scanning Corporation now, please wait...
Scanning...
Scanning...
There have been 6,553 profit(s) found in your Coporation today! Congratuations!
Click now to give an automatic bonus to the software engineers who work for Corporation!
Note: It is strongly recommended to perform this Scan on a regular basis and by clicking above, you have agreed to perform this Scan every week.
There are mandates that are passed all the time in our own government that the populist support isn't necessary. I'd argue it was the same at that time. Populist support was not crucial and again, it ignores the work done by dozens or even hundreds of people behind the scenes.
No, his use and abuse of the military hierarchy made the holocaust possible. His use and abuse of the scientific process (testing of Zyklon-B for example and other studies which tortured or killed people) made the holocaust possible.
It's like saying Bush was a powerful orator whose freedom of speech got us involved in the Iraq war. It doesn't take into consideration all the time, effort and resources that the rest of the government and soldiers spent in bringing it about.
Historically, it has been borne out that not all of the high-ranking decision makers agreed with Hitler on his Final Solution of eradicating Jews and other "undesirables", yet they still carried out his orders for reasons which had absolutely nothing to do with that dictator's "freedom of speech."
Well, no actually. You're assuming that British people study the US constitution - they don't.
I also don't assume American people study the British laws -- but I expect our diplomats and heads of state to know at least the tiniest iota of the country's laws that we're trying to deal with before making rather ridiculous requests.
You're seriously conflating one man's speech (speaking) to the actual military orders that he issued to tens of thousands of German politicians, military generals, soldiers, and Nazi sympathizers who carried out those orders over months and years of dedicated extermination?
Even Emacs Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.
The Internet was straining to keep up as you posted that.
(but it was a funny read!)
I hope they don't find the bodies that I buried on my Farmville.
"Yes, your honor, we not only have a confession from Mr. Interoperable about his multiple murders, but we have conclusive proof of his Wars with the Mafia."
Some TSA schmuck wants to check my balls? I just give 'em my wife's purse.
Ok, so they chose to leave the male end sticking out of the wall- and instead of using some sort of extension cord plug the laptop directly in.
Oh, is that how they're doing it? I figured that they'd simply tape a huge, ugly plastic flower to it like they do with pens in banks and grocery stores so that you can use it freely but then you can't claim you "accidentally" walked off with it.
>The judge is an idiot and not fit to sit the bench.
The judge is smart enough to realize that a lawsuit against the kid will open up the woman's medical records to the court, and will demand testimony from the doctor who treated her, and who presumably didn't do everything possible to save her life. She didn't bleed out on the street under the kid's bike. She died after months of (mis)treatment by a quack. I think that's an important element to this story that's being overlooked because of the sensational nature of the child being sued.
You've said this like six times already in this thread and I frankly think it needs to be said six more. Of course, even if true (which the more I think about it, you're right), it still does not excuse the plaintiff's attorneys from being scummy by putting this child and her family through this legal wringer just so they can get to the doctors and doctors' insurance companies.
The difference is that Texans and New Yorkers speak approximately the same language, whereas Americans would need to converse with their politicians in a foreign language, most likely English.
I think this might have been a stroke of genius that will end up with the insane laws being changed.
Or it might just have been a stroke. You never know.
You made a blanket statement that "...you could walk away from Verizon at any point..." which is true but considering the vast majority of cell phone users do have contracts, this walking away also has a steep cost. Exactly as is planned and counted upon by Verizon and all the other cell phone companies. Also, even though it's been deemed legal, I think the elements of "meeting of the minds" and "undue influence" should be revisited in relation to contract law and cell phone companies. More and more, I believe that there is no equal footing when it comes to these kinds of contracts (which also applies to employment, but that's a subject for a different thread).
Sure there are. Good luck in getting it applied in your favor if you're not a mega-corporation like Verizon.
If you noticed on the new Star Trek movie, the Vulcan "school" consisted of hemispherical depressions in which students were forced to stand while being bombarded with questions. Lets do that.
Actually, the school that was featured in Serenity would probably be far better as was mentioned upthread by several posters: sitting on a comfortable mat on the floor with desks at a proper height, outdoors (in good weather) AND their cool futuristic iPads. Everyone wins! Well, except in *my* version of this Utopia, all the students' computers would be running some flavor of Linux.
Exactly. "Oh, I overcharged you a thousand dollars and this judge told me I had to pay you back. Here, have three bucks. Sorry 'bout that."
and seeing these lists of small fees added on to all my bills, feeling really helpless.
A business attaching fees to your invoices is all it takes to make you feel "really helpless"? You know you could walk away from Verizon Wireless anytime you want, right? Wireless service is hardly a matter of life and death....
Yup, and pay a $400 early termination fee. Man, that'll really teach Verizon a lesson!