You've forgot about the whole Larry Franklin AIPAC scandal - US State Secrets, funelled to AIPAC by untrustworthy Bush appointees to the Pentagon, funelled to Mossad. Yay!
Really, Israel is far more valuable an ally than even Britain.
Absolute FUCKING bullshit!
Name ONE time where Israel was used to stage US troops for a war for the US. Name ONE engagement where Israeli foreign troops were part of a coalition with the US.
How many Israeli troops participated in Gulf War I? How many Israeli troops participated in O.I.L.? How many Israeli troops are in Afghanistan, helping the US with peacekeeping? How many US flights and air patrols are flying out of Israel in support of O.I.L.? (instead of incredibly FUCKING expensive aircraft carriers).
The Patriot missile used in the first Gulf War was based on an upgrade of the Hawk missile, by the way.
Israel is a fucking useless ally in the Middle East, because we can't use their bases, or their troops, without inflaming the entire Arab world - it's bad enough that we're invading their countries, but it's just politically impossible to collaborate with Israel on it.
And shared ideals of freedom and democracy? That's a joke. As a palestinian what they think of Israel's ideas of freedom and democracy.
Don't delude yourself for a moment about their motives. They, like the rest of the human race, were motivated by money.
What a bunch of crap. By the way, your High School called, they want your diploma back, because you obviously slept through your US History requirement.
You see, our founding fathers did this thing called "writing" and they communicated with eachother by means of vast volumes of mail, and in these communications, which are now historical documents, is contained a large amount of information on what these men thought, what they believed, and why they believed it. Any serious student of history knows for a fact that their driving philosophy of life was not "every man for himself, I've got my money, now you go get yours."
...because it showed that terrorists were ready to go "all in" to cause as much destruction as possible to America,
Absolute bullshit. There have been suicide bombers for decades. They had the will - all they lacked was the means. In 1972-ish, a guy planned to hijack a plane and crash it into the whitehouse. In the 80's there was a hijacking in france, planning to crash the plane into the eiffel tower. This was not something that nobody pre-911 had ever imagined before.
Simple airline security precautions are what we needed. Not my reading list.
Considering how archaeologists will dig through a fossilized dung heap to try to figure out what an ancient civilization ate, I think you're dead wrong on whether archaeologists in 100 years will want to read someone's archived myspace blog contents.
Right now, the oldest culture on earth was the ancient egyptians. They were nice enough to leave lots of written records, but it took us hundreds of years to figure out what their writing meant - and we had to cheat to do it (by the lucky discovery of the rosetta stone). And even with that information, we still only know information that is "official" - what the priests or other government officials wanted to record. There are many instances where inconvenient events were stricken from official records or covered up. We still do not know all the details on some of the most significant events of egyptian history because of revisionism by officials. (like the reign of Amenhotep IV, Tutenkhamen's father). If the ancient egyptians had an internet, and if every ancient egyptian had a blog page, and recorded the most inane stupid crap about the shape of the hairball their cat spit up, I guarantee you that historians, archaeologists, and art historians would fight eachother to the death over access to that information.
I never had a doubt as to whether Microsoft has the technical capabilities to produce good products.
I just doubt whether they have the WILL to produce a product that will be as good as Google's search engine.
The thing, to me, that makes Google great, is the simplicity of their homepage (text based, minimal graphics, no flash, no banners, no crap).
I know Microsoft can do that. I just don't believe they will. Maybe they'll do it for a short time, to lure people with a "first-hit-free" policy, and then later load up on ActiveX controls, IE-only coding, frames, banners, flash, crapware, covert "sponsored results", etc.
If they're worried about videogames causing violence, maybe they should look to the violence that resulted when the British Government interfered with the private lives of American Colonists. That was pretty violent.
I don't think it's unreasonable for companies to expect a profit from their research.
Of course not. But it IS unreasonable for companies to characterize profit less than 30% to be "not worthwhile" - especially when advertising budgets are typically 5 times that or R&D (a lifesaving drug should need an advertising budget of approximately $0.)
The pharmaceutical industry is far from "unprofitable".
But when a pharmaceutical company whines and dines a congressman, and takes him on a hunting trip or a golf outing to scotland, (etc.) he can make the absurd argument that "oh, my scientists are starving, our entire enterprise is going to go bankrupt, and there will be no new drugs at all if we don't get some handouts soon! - how do you think that affects the regulatory environment. They always assert that they can't continue to innovate without more money. I'm aware of what testing costs, I'm aware of what modern cutting edge research costs. There's still that nagging fact that drug company R&D is not the top line-item in their budget. There is not as dire a relationship between high profitability and innovation. There IS a relationship between company profitability, and the square footage of the CEO's vacation home in Aspen.
There's really only two ways to deal with this. Either you find some way of getting more money to the drug companies so more lines of research become profitabe, or you have the government do it. But why anybody would think the government could do better I have no idea.
Actually, you just cited two ways to deal with this. And actually, it's a false dichotomy. And actually - when you even accept the notion of a Patent, the Government already IS involved. Then when you consider the reality that much of the cutting edge research is actually done at universities, many of them state-funded, while the IP that's generated is then funnelled to the drug company that markets the drug, you're illusion of the Proud Brave Libertairan Ideal Free Enterprise Innovating Heroic Drug Company kind of breaks down. And it's about time. It's kind of tired and old, and most people with an IQ over 100 aren't fooled by it anymore.
Some scientists worry that even with a bunch of new antibiotics hitting the market, there still aren't enough and they want legislation to make it easier for companies to develop them."
Some scientists? Or some pharmaceutical company lobbyists?
. . . and by "legislation". . . I assume they mean "more government handouts, tax breaks, bogus tort-reform to free them from responsibility for adequate testing, and patent extensions"
#1 priority for the Biodiesel crowd should be to get lawmakers to pay attention.
Biodiesel in California is suffering under the weight of fascistic emissions rules - you can't even buy any of the cars you mention, in California anymore. I had to go out of state to buy an 03 Jetta TDI.
Ironically, the trucks, with NO emissions controls whatsoever, remain completely unregulated. Yet commuters are deprived of the ability of making the responsible choice to go with biodiesel-fueled vehicles. This regulatory environment is insanity.
Well, if you count the cost of building and maintaining the huge military machine we need in order to maintain a good supply of foreign oil as a subsidy, Petroleum, which is stored energy we dig up out of the ground for free, is probably draining our economy of energy as well.
The nice thing about switch grass in particular is that it requires way less "help" than other crops, especially here in the good ole US of A. That makes it cheaper and requires less potentially damaging chemicals.
Even better - when global warming brings about a rise in sea-levels, we'll have plenty more marshlands in Florida where we can grow the stuff!
Although I'm not a big fan of President Bush, I do think switchgrass is a good idea, especially after hearing a scientist at a university talk about it on NPR after the State of the Union.
What does Bush have to do with switchgrass? He did one photo op at a facility which had laid off most of the workers after he slashed their budget? Bush has been a part of the petroleum industry most of his (dismal failure of a) career, and has supported it for most of his presidency. Mentioning Bush during a discussion of the importance alternative fuels is like mentioning Hitler during a discussion of the importance of racial diversity. It's just not necessary, and basically just propogates misleading crap. If Bush were truly serious about this - even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and buy into the notion that he's had an epiphany about the relationship between foreign oil dependence and national security (an idea that his political opponents, "not serious about national security" have been talking about for 30+ years) I would expect him to show this is true by making some serious policy changes, budget re-allocations, or even new programs. His last-minute reprieve for the workers at that Colorado research facility (who had already moved on and found jobs elsewhere) was less meaningful than a token gesture.
I do most of my work on Windows systems, mostly security and integration-type stuff. But when it comes to consumer-level activities on Windows, I'm totally ignorant, because I have a Mac at home. I've been part of the rip-mix-burn culture for about 10 years now, and seriously, I've never had any trouble on my Mac, except for the few legitimately purchased iTMS tracks, which I've probably lost track of, and one day will probably give me a nasty DRM suprise. But those are the minority of my music.
But I was shocked last year, when I had a freind show me her Dell laptop, with iTunes, and a couple of other music players, and the dozens of different formats of music she had, and how some songs would play on some players, but wouldn't even import to other players, some songs wouldn't play at all, and of course the thing was stuffed to the gills with spyware and adware. Stuff she had legitimately paid for, she couldn't use. Stuff that I've ripped contrary to RIAA's wishes (but not contrary to US fair use rights, in most cases), I can use just fine.
So this is the thing. It's about usability. This is what the whole Personal Computer revolution is based on. The evolution from Mainframes and Minicomputers, running systems that only experts can use, to a Personal Computer, that the average joe can afford to buy, and figure out how to use. And the Copyright Fascists want to roll the industry back. People are paying thousands of dollars to buy computers, and finding out the hard way, that they can't use them in the way they want to or expect to - and in some cases, if they were technically savvy enough to figure out how the DRM was supposed to work, maybe they can get by. But more often then not, they've inadvertently moved something to another folder, reinstalled the OS to fix an adware or virus problem, or upgraded to a different music player, and all of a sudden, things don't work anymore, and all they know is they paid through the nose for music they can't listen to anymore.
A big part of the explosion of the internet in the mid-to-late 1990's was because of broadband, and Napster. You think adoption rates are going to continue to expand when broadband companies are clamping down (tiered rates, privacy violations, crappy service, monopolistic pricing) and the Copyright Fascists are clamping down with DRM that makes things much harder to use? On the same vein, do you think that folks are going to be rushing out to pay $5000 for an HDTV, and $40 per title, to watch HD DVD content, only to find out that the key for their TV, or maybe their amp, or switch, has been revoked by the Copyright Fascists? This industry has thrived on ease of use. And they're ready to flush it down the toilet - because they believe they'll be able to make more money, when it's really about power and control, and they're going to find that their market is a lot smaller than they thought it was.
would the disadvantages of home-schooling (i.e. lack of daily contact with peers) outweight the benefits of home-schooling (i.e. lack of daily contact with peers) with responsible and educated parents? Discuss.
In home-schooling, parents often pool their resources with other parents in co-ops, which includes parents with certain areas of expertise (computers, or a foreign language, for example) can teach a subject to a group of kids. Or the co-ops sometimes get together on group field trips. This kind of activity typically provides plenty of "daily contact with peers". Plus, kids can still do sports teams, Scouting and/or Venturing, 4H, etc. Not all parents can or do participate in a co-op. That's a problem for those specific kids - but it's not a valid criticism of homeschooling in general.
The real disadvantage to homeschooling is that it draws resources away from public school districts, which further degrades the schools' quality, (now I'm going to carefully walk the edge of the slippery-slope here) and encourages more families to home-school (the same can be said of private schools) - and in a society where public school is subsumed altogether, low-income families do not have a state-funded daycare, and thus will be deprived of the extra income. Additionally, low-income families tend to have parents who are not themselves well-educated, and thus are terrible educators for their children.
Say what you will about the moral calculus of public-school-as-state-funded-daycare-for-low-inco me-parents, or as a Social Engineering product to get the children of whack-jobs on the same page with regard to society's views of racism, equal opportunity, scientific views of the world. Are these good things for us all, or bad things? Are we better off with the economic bottom 30% of our society at least minimally educated so that they are at least minimally able to be employed? Or are we better off saving the money spent on public education, and causing the economic bottom 30% to be even more desperately poor, with no opportunity to advance economically from generation to generation? Does this then incur other expenses for such a society, like welfare, security against mobs, riots, and crime (and terrorism) that such economic desperation leads to, higher labor costs for minimally educated people (with corresponding lower labor costs for those who are not minimally educated - jobs like janitors, farm and construction laborers, etc). And the final, most important question - is it even possible to discuss or debate this issue to this level, on a bumper-sticker or AM-talk-radio format? I posit "No, it is not possible". And since that's the only meaningful debate that happens in this country anymore, it's really all just a moot point anyway.
They want to use open source software, but they're opposed to open-source IC engines (ie. they support the "weld the hood shut, and treat shadetree mechanics like criminals" approach to enforcing automotive emissions controls).
I had mod points, but none of the negative mods quite say it.
He gets what he deserves?
The guy is an American Patriot! A Hero! He deserves a medal! He deserves a statue! He deserves a public apology from the executives of Diebold, and the jackass procurement wankers who bought Diebold's stuff, and the assmunch congressmen who pushed for the bill that paid for the procurement. He especially deserves an apology from a fascism-apologist like yourself.
Look at just about* every "killer app" generated by the internet, and they all have the same characteristic: Nobody found a way to make killer money off of it.
Email, Instant Messaging, Blogging.
The fact is - if someone figured out a way to make money off of these killer apps, people would stop using them.
You're telling me that a healthy replacement ticker is just a matter of having enough cash, and an evil scumbag lying amoral motherfucker like Dick Cheney goes through life with a bum ticker? Theres more to it than that.
Slashdot Mirror
You've forgot about the whole Larry Franklin AIPAC scandal - US State Secrets, funelled to AIPAC by untrustworthy Bush appointees to the Pentagon, funelled to Mossad. Yay!
Really, Israel is far more valuable an ally than even Britain.
Absolute FUCKING bullshit!
Name ONE time where Israel was used to stage US troops for a war for the US.
Name ONE engagement where Israeli foreign troops were part of a coalition with the US.
How many Israeli troops participated in Gulf War I?
How many Israeli troops participated in O.I.L.?
How many Israeli troops are in Afghanistan, helping the US with peacekeeping?
How many US flights and air patrols are flying out of Israel in support of O.I.L.? (instead of incredibly FUCKING expensive aircraft carriers).
The Patriot missile used in the first Gulf War was based on an upgrade of the Hawk missile, by the way.
Israel is a fucking useless ally in the Middle East, because we can't use their bases, or their troops, without inflaming the entire Arab world - it's bad enough that we're invading their countries, but it's just politically impossible to collaborate with Israel on it.
And shared ideals of freedom and democracy? That's a joke. As a palestinian what they think of Israel's ideas of freedom and democracy.
Don't delude yourself for a moment about their motives. They, like the rest of the human race, were motivated by money.
What a bunch of crap. By the way, your High School called, they want your diploma back, because you obviously slept through your US History requirement.
You see, our founding fathers did this thing called "writing" and they communicated with eachother by means of vast volumes of mail, and in these communications, which are now historical documents, is contained a large amount of information on what these men thought, what they believed, and why they believed it. Any serious student of history knows for a fact that their driving philosophy of life was not "every man for himself, I've got my money, now you go get yours."
...because it showed that terrorists were ready to go "all in" to cause as much destruction as possible to America,
Absolute bullshit. There have been suicide bombers for decades. They had the will - all they lacked was the means. In 1972-ish, a guy planned to hijack a plane and crash it into the whitehouse. In the 80's there was a hijacking in france, planning to crash the plane into the eiffel tower. This was not something that nobody pre-911 had ever imagined before.
Simple airline security precautions are what we needed. Not my reading list.
Proponents of the PATRIOT ACT have a pre-1776 mindset.
Considering how archaeologists will dig through a fossilized dung heap to try to figure out what an ancient civilization ate, I think you're dead wrong on whether archaeologists in 100 years will want to read someone's archived myspace blog contents.
Right now, the oldest culture on earth was the ancient egyptians. They were nice enough to leave lots of written records, but it took us hundreds of years to figure out what their writing meant - and we had to cheat to do it (by the lucky discovery of the rosetta stone). And even with that information, we still only know information that is "official" - what the priests or other government officials wanted to record. There are many instances where inconvenient events were stricken from official records or covered up. We still do not know all the details on some of the most significant events of egyptian history because of revisionism by officials. (like the reign of Amenhotep IV, Tutenkhamen's father). If the ancient egyptians had an internet, and if every ancient egyptian had a blog page, and recorded the most inane stupid crap about the shape of the hairball their cat spit up, I guarantee you that historians, archaeologists, and art historians would fight eachother to the death over access to that information.
I never had a doubt as to whether Microsoft has the technical capabilities to produce good products.
I just doubt whether they have the WILL to produce a product that will be as good as Google's search engine.
The thing, to me, that makes Google great, is the simplicity of their homepage (text based, minimal graphics, no flash, no banners, no crap).
I know Microsoft can do that. I just don't believe they will. Maybe they'll do it for a short time, to lure people with a "first-hit-free" policy, and then later load up on ActiveX controls, IE-only coding, frames, banners, flash, crapware, covert "sponsored results", etc.
If they're worried about videogames causing violence, maybe they should look to the violence that resulted when the British Government interfered with the private lives of American Colonists. That was pretty violent.
I don't think it's unreasonable for companies to expect a profit from their research.
Of course not. But it IS unreasonable for companies to characterize profit less than 30% to be "not worthwhile" - especially when advertising budgets are typically 5 times that or R&D (a lifesaving drug should need an advertising budget of approximately $0.)
The pharmaceutical industry is far from "unprofitable".
But when a pharmaceutical company whines and dines a congressman, and takes him on a hunting trip or a golf outing to scotland, (etc.) he can make the absurd argument that "oh, my scientists are starving, our entire enterprise is going to go bankrupt, and there will be no new drugs at all if we don't get some handouts soon! - how do you think that affects the regulatory environment. They always assert that they can't continue to innovate without more money. I'm aware of what testing costs, I'm aware of what modern cutting edge research costs. There's still that nagging fact that drug company R&D is not the top line-item in their budget. There is not as dire a relationship between high profitability and innovation. There IS a relationship between company profitability, and the square footage of the CEO's vacation home in Aspen.
There's really only two ways to deal with this. Either you find some way of getting more money to the drug companies so more lines of research become profitabe, or you have the government do it. But why anybody would think the government could do better I have no idea.
Actually, you just cited two ways to deal with this. And actually, it's a false dichotomy. And actually - when you even accept the notion of a Patent, the Government already IS involved. Then when you consider the reality that much of the cutting edge research is actually done at universities, many of them state-funded, while the IP that's generated is then funnelled to the drug company that markets the drug, you're illusion of the Proud Brave Libertairan Ideal Free Enterprise Innovating Heroic Drug Company kind of breaks down. And it's about time. It's kind of tired and old, and most people with an IQ over 100 aren't fooled by it anymore.
Some scientists worry that even with a bunch of new antibiotics hitting the market, there still aren't enough and they want legislation to make it easier for companies to develop them."
Some scientists? Or some pharmaceutical company lobbyists?
. . . and by "legislation". . . I assume they mean "more government handouts, tax breaks, bogus tort-reform to free them from responsibility for adequate testing, and patent extensions"
#1 priority for the Biodiesel crowd should be to get lawmakers to pay attention.
Biodiesel in California is suffering under the weight of fascistic emissions rules - you can't even buy any of the cars you mention, in California anymore. I had to go out of state to buy an 03 Jetta TDI.
Ironically, the trucks, with NO emissions controls whatsoever, remain completely unregulated. Yet commuters are deprived of the ability of making the responsible choice to go with biodiesel-fueled vehicles. This regulatory environment is insanity.
Well, if you count the cost of building and maintaining the huge military machine we need in order to maintain a good supply of foreign oil as a subsidy, Petroleum, which is stored energy we dig up out of the ground for free, is probably draining our economy of energy as well.
Convince people to live closer to their workplaces,
well, I'd really rather convince my employer to move the office closer to my work.
That's what they said about $30/bbl, back when oil was $20/bbl.
The nice thing about switch grass in particular is that it requires way less "help" than other crops, especially here in the good ole US of A. That makes it cheaper and requires less potentially damaging chemicals.
Even better - when global warming brings about a rise in sea-levels, we'll have plenty more marshlands in Florida where we can grow the stuff!
Although I'm not a big fan of President Bush, I do think switchgrass is a good idea, especially after hearing a scientist at a university talk about it on NPR after the State of the Union.
What does Bush have to do with switchgrass? He did one photo op at a facility which had laid off most of the workers after he slashed their budget? Bush has been a part of the petroleum industry most of his (dismal failure of a) career, and has supported it for most of his presidency. Mentioning Bush during a discussion of the importance alternative fuels is like mentioning Hitler during a discussion of the importance of racial diversity. It's just not necessary, and basically just propogates misleading crap. If Bush were truly serious about this - even if we give him the benefit of the doubt and buy into the notion that he's had an epiphany about the relationship between foreign oil dependence and national security (an idea that his political opponents, "not serious about national security" have been talking about for 30+ years) I would expect him to show this is true by making some serious policy changes, budget re-allocations, or even new programs. His last-minute reprieve for the workers at that Colorado research facility (who had already moved on and found jobs elsewhere) was less meaningful than a token gesture.
I'm not a big fan of Bush either, by the way.
I do most of my work on Windows systems, mostly security and integration-type stuff. But when it comes to consumer-level activities on Windows, I'm totally ignorant, because I have a Mac at home. I've been part of the rip-mix-burn culture for about 10 years now, and seriously, I've never had any trouble on my Mac, except for the few legitimately purchased iTMS tracks, which I've probably lost track of, and one day will probably give me a nasty DRM suprise. But those are the minority of my music.
But I was shocked last year, when I had a freind show me her Dell laptop, with iTunes, and a couple of other music players, and the dozens of different formats of music she had, and how some songs would play on some players, but wouldn't even import to other players, some songs wouldn't play at all, and of course the thing was stuffed to the gills with spyware and adware. Stuff she had legitimately paid for, she couldn't use. Stuff that I've ripped contrary to RIAA's wishes (but not contrary to US fair use rights, in most cases), I can use just fine.
So this is the thing. It's about usability. This is what the whole Personal Computer revolution is based on. The evolution from Mainframes and Minicomputers, running systems that only experts can use, to a Personal Computer, that the average joe can afford to buy, and figure out how to use. And the Copyright Fascists want to roll the industry back. People are paying thousands of dollars to buy computers, and finding out the hard way, that they can't use them in the way they want to or expect to - and in some cases, if they were technically savvy enough to figure out how the DRM was supposed to work, maybe they can get by. But more often then not, they've inadvertently moved something to another folder, reinstalled the OS to fix an adware or virus problem, or upgraded to a different music player, and all of a sudden, things don't work anymore, and all they know is they paid through the nose for music they can't listen to anymore.
A big part of the explosion of the internet in the mid-to-late 1990's was because of broadband, and Napster. You think adoption rates are going to continue to expand when broadband companies are clamping down (tiered rates, privacy violations, crappy service, monopolistic pricing) and the Copyright Fascists are clamping down with DRM that makes things much harder to use? On the same vein, do you think that folks are going to be rushing out to pay $5000 for an HDTV, and $40 per title, to watch HD DVD content, only to find out that the key for their TV, or maybe their amp, or switch, has been revoked by the Copyright Fascists? This industry has thrived on ease of use. And they're ready to flush it down the toilet - because they believe they'll be able to make more money, when it's really about power and control, and they're going to find that their market is a lot smaller than they thought it was.
would the disadvantages of home-schooling (i.e. lack of daily contact with peers) outweight the benefits of home-schooling (i.e. lack of daily contact with peers) with responsible and educated parents? Discuss.
o me-parents, or as a Social Engineering product to get the children of whack-jobs on the same page with regard to society's views of racism, equal opportunity, scientific views of the world. Are these good things for us all, or bad things? Are we better off with the economic bottom 30% of our society at least minimally educated so that they are at least minimally able to be employed? Or are we better off saving the money spent on public education, and causing the economic bottom 30% to be even more desperately poor, with no opportunity to advance economically from generation to generation? Does this then incur other expenses for such a society, like welfare, security against mobs, riots, and crime (and terrorism) that such economic desperation leads to, higher labor costs for minimally educated people (with corresponding lower labor costs for those who are not minimally educated - jobs like janitors, farm and construction laborers, etc). And the final, most important question - is it even possible to discuss or debate this issue to this level, on a bumper-sticker or AM-talk-radio format? I posit "No, it is not possible". And since that's the only meaningful debate that happens in this country anymore, it's really all just a moot point anyway.
In home-schooling, parents often pool their resources with other parents in co-ops, which includes parents with certain areas of expertise (computers, or a foreign language, for example) can teach a subject to a group of kids. Or the co-ops sometimes get together on group field trips. This kind of activity typically provides plenty of "daily contact with peers". Plus, kids can still do sports teams, Scouting and/or Venturing, 4H, etc. Not all parents can or do participate in a co-op. That's a problem for those specific kids - but it's not a valid criticism of homeschooling in general.
The real disadvantage to homeschooling is that it draws resources away from public school districts, which further degrades the schools' quality, (now I'm going to carefully walk the edge of the slippery-slope here) and encourages more families to home-school (the same can be said of private schools) - and in a society where public school is subsumed altogether, low-income families do not have a state-funded daycare, and thus will be deprived of the extra income. Additionally, low-income families tend to have parents who are not themselves well-educated, and thus are terrible educators for their children.
Say what you will about the moral calculus of public-school-as-state-funded-daycare-for-low-inc
It's time we stopped blaming technology for merely giving people opportunities to show their moral fibre.
VERY well put!
Alas, I squandered my mod points on a troll yesterday.
They want to use open source software, but they're opposed to open-source IC engines (ie. they support the "weld the hood shut, and treat shadetree mechanics like criminals" approach to enforcing automotive emissions controls).
I had mod points, but none of the negative mods quite say it.
He gets what he deserves?
The guy is an American Patriot! A Hero! He deserves a medal! He deserves a statue! He deserves a public apology from the executives of Diebold, and the jackass procurement wankers who bought Diebold's stuff, and the assmunch congressmen who pushed for the bill that paid for the procurement. He especially deserves an apology from a fascism-apologist like yourself.
Look at just about* every "killer app" generated by the internet, and they all have the same characteristic: Nobody found a way to make killer money off of it.
Email, Instant Messaging, Blogging.
The fact is - if someone figured out a way to make money off of these killer apps, people would stop using them.
*(one exception - porn)
I call BS.
You're telling me that a healthy replacement ticker is just a matter of having enough cash, and an evil scumbag lying amoral motherfucker like Dick Cheney goes through life with a bum ticker? Theres more to it than that.
. . . yeah, even better when terrorists figure out how to shield a handgun from magnetic detection in airport security. Can't wait for that to happen.
Funny? I wasn't joking.