but then again, the scriptures say Pi=3, so what's the point? You either have to bend reality to accept that belief (that circles are hexagons), or you have to accept scriptural fallability. If you accept scriptural fallability, a whole lot of other things collapse with it. Unfortunately. Maintaining a belief in the Divine does not require belief in scriptural infallability - but it does make it awful hard to justify things like, church, and observance of religious laws, and the portrayed history of the OT-era.
other plantes wouldn't have the slightest impact on overcrowding. Until we figured out how to move BILLIONS of people off the planet, cheaper than we could kill them.
And even if we did trim the population from say, 10 billion, back down to 6 or so - wouldn't it be a very short while before we were back up to 10 again?
Face it - the ONLY hope of easing overcrowding is population control. And there are only TWO ways to control population. A strong totalitarian government, or (apparently) global industrialization. Or, I suppose the old standby's, war, plague, famine.
I would think that such a planet would probably never get any meteor impacts. What could get past those gas giants? However, look at the perturbations that would be caused by passing that innner gas-giant every year (gas-giant's year) - the planet would have a stable orbit, but HOW stable? And would it be stable enough to maintain a normal climate? Or would they be innundated with alternating hothouse and ice age conditions? And is the inner gas-giant close enough to cause tidal forces (and strong geothermal/volcanic activity?)
Whatever would evolve on that world would likely be one tough sonofabitch.
Only some quirks of Earth's formation and evolution (mainly the presence of the moon) give us an atmosphere thin enough to let our type of climate and our type of life exist.
Interesting. Could you elaborate on this? (which quirks? how does the moon fit in to this?
It was 8 years ago, and companies were DESPERATE for anyone who knew how to turn a computer on.
My salary went from $18k to $40k that year. Although with the raise, I was also offered a new position, a promotion, so there were none of the shortcomings, like being the tall-blade when the lawnmower came.
I still have that job, and I'm making over $70k (plus stock options) today, and have survived three acquisitions (the company was acquired) and god knows how many layoffs.
In today's climate, I sure as hell wouldn't risk it. It's also a very different company. When I accepted the counter-offer, there were like 100 employees, and I was on a first name basis with the senior staff, including the CEO. Now, there's a couple orders of magnitude more employees, I've never been to the company headquarters, and never met anyone above Director level. I can trust MY manager, but I don't trust HER manager, and I sure as hell don't trust the CEO. I hear he cheats at golf. Totally different culture, different set of risks. And this is really the main factor you should be looking at.
Veritas has MANY products, and most of them were acquired, so they have very different roots/architecture. NB Pro has almost nothing in common with BE except the open file manager and licensing. (in fact, NB Pro has very little in common with NBU, their other tape backup software).
the cane? naw, that's like my senile old grandmother who pretends she's deaf so she doesn't have to engage in conversations with people she doesn't like, and so that people feel sorry for her. Conniving old bat.
And what do you think is useful? Monkey style? I hate to tell you this but Aikido people were the ones kicking most of the ass in Ulitmate Fighting. Gracy was an Aikido guy.
Reach is fine and dandy, but speed and power win out. In the REAL world, very few matches are going to occur where one person outclasses another in speed and power enough to make a difference. In a fantasy world, where you've got the Force Mastery and all dat, it could easily make a difference.
That said, I'd like to add; a WISE fighter uses his opponent's strength against him. Isn't Yoda a WISE character?
The lack of wisdom in the jumping and flipping has been talked about.
How could Yoda have used his lack of reach to his advantage? Yoda can reach targets on Dooku's body, that Dooku can't easily defend, by virtue of height. And as funny as it may sound, attacking Dooku's shins and ankles would have been excellent strategy, and I really wish that the fight choreographers had thought of that - instead of feeding us the same mad jumping screaming and flipping that the martial arts "industry" has been feeding us since Bruce Lee and before.
Once Yoda had a good hit on an ankle, Dooku would be crippled, and a much easier target.
Here's another example of why AOTC's portrayal was just plain WRONG. Remember ESB, when Luke and Vader squared off? For much of the fight, Vader was calm, didn't do a lot of gymnastics, and even fought one-handed - compared to Luke's balls out two handed sweating grunting fighting. Luke was obviously totally outclassed, and Vader fought with. . . dignity. Superiority. He was schooling Luke. That was how Yoda vs. Dooku should have been treated. In fact, had I scripted it, I would have had Dooku lose a foot, and he could still have narrowly escaped with the same trick (though I would have made the tumbling object MUCH larger, because Yoda should not have had any problems moving that silly little beam).
The recent Queen of the Kingdom of the West - was denied entry to the US (she's an Australian Citizen - just happens to be the chick that King Uthar is dating) post 9/11.
Suspected ties to subversives is the rumored reason for denial. She isn't applying for citizenship - just a temporary visa so she can hang out for 6 months and be queen.
They didn't toss hundreds of thousands of baby boomers into prison for smoking a joint. That honor is reserved for THIS generation.
(while pot WAS illegal back then, they certainly did not enforce it with the volume and vigor that they've been using for the past 20 years.)
Sure the hippies of the 60's got hassled by the man a lot. But MY generation is downright opressed in comparison. Nobody should wonder why we don't speak out.
- - I agree that content providers should be paid via the fee that the home user pays to his or her ISP, but then - how do you enforce that. And in the end, aren't we talking about the MSN/AOL model? Didn't that model largely fail? (compuserve, prodigy, etc) - If most internet users belong to MSN or AOL, then they're paying for special premium content, but they're also taking advantage of the large amount of FREE content. Which is ultimately going away.
Anyone who doesn't realize that NEW CARS ARE FOR SUCKERS - is a sucker.
They lose 30-40% of their value when you drive them off the lot - and - the dealership wasn't really interested in selling you a car in the first place. Car dealers don't sell cars. They sell financing.
I haven't bought a new car in over 10 years. Old used cars get you to work and back - what more do you need? I've had a 1991 Volvo 240 that I bought two years ago for $5000. Cash. It's safe, gets 25 mpg, and reliable as hell. It's not rusted out, the interior isn't worn, though the styling isn't that great. Also, VERY easy to work on. Last new car I did buy was an Acura Integra, and that actually was a very nice car, gave me zero trouble for 5 years. These people buying crap cars amaze me. The idiots buying Ford Focus - what don't you watch the news? You're paying $500/mo for a tiny, unsafe econobox that's had 8 recalls? Idiots.
Re:I think it's harder for single people
on
The Almighty Buck
·
· Score: 2
crime? In the UK? I thought you blokes were safe since you outlawed guns.
For those who complain of the 3000+ (unverified) "innocent civilians" killed in the US Bombing in Afghanistan - it would be good to think about the 50,000 that were slaughtered by their own people in the power vacuum after the Soviets pulled out. SOMEONE has to rule and be in power, otherwise you're going to have a zillion bullies fighting over their square mile of turf, not giving a shit who gets killed in the crossfire. Believe it or not, most Americans DO care that innocent civilians were killed, and don't view it as any kind of "payback". We view it as an improvement over the situation when the last government left power.
So, you're saying that any time some whack-job lights off a bomb or crashes a plane into a building, we should just roll over and do what they ask?
You define "terrorism" quite loosely, and in fact, I think you're probably buying into the semi-compelling bin Laden propaganda. If someone straps on a military uniform, has a rank, and follows orders, orders to go and kill people for whatever reason - that's not terrorism. It's war. If someone wearing street clothes walks into a crowded mall and detonates a bomb, sacrificing themselves for the mere purpose of deception in order to optimize delivery - that person is a criminal and a murderer, no matter how many screaming zealots claim they're a martyr. And THAT, my friend is Terrorism. It is not civilized, it should not be accepted, and it is totally different than enforcing policy through military violence. One has accountability, the other does not. In Vietnam - whether you want to believe it or not, a lot of people in the government and the military caught a lot of heat over our actions in southeast asia. In fact, it cause a huge political schism in this country - which is a legacy that continues to that day. The soldiers wore uniforms with name tags. Their officers had jobs and were known to the public. The political leaders were subject to electoral votes to keep their jobs. THAT'S accountability. In Palestine, a bunch of guys sneak around and anonymously plan and support the bombers. Nobody stands up with a backbone and claims responsibility for the bombings. They spinelessly whine and say: oh -that's YOUR fault, for your policies. Their "leaders" promise that they'll try to stop the attacks and the attacks go on. Clearly this is not a leader. Just a person waving papers, distracting us from who we should really be dealing with. Then they march in parades with masks covering their faces. In the US, we outlawed people who marched in parades wearing white masks. Same guys who used to have parties late at night with burning crosses, and lynchings. That's the kind of people we're dealing with here. Spinless cowards who won't stand up and face the consequences of their actions, who back up their actions with a name. The only ones who are known by name (the leaders) shun responsibility and say that "oh, it wasn't me, I didn't give them money for the explosives, I only told them that the US is evil. It's not my fault they blew up your embassy - must be yours for being evil.
I agree. I'm as big an NWO conspiracy theory nut as anyone. But if Jar Jar Bush had wanted to put this country under Martial Law - he'd have done it on September 12th. Hell, I would have done it, and I'm not a megalomaniac.
Obviously, it would be STUPID to have put the US under martial law - or to do it today, or any time in the future, because our strength is our economy, and Martial Law would kill that. I think that's the main philosophical component of US Republican thought: it's our FREEDOM which makes our economy strong, (stronger than those other slackers over there), and our economy which defends our freedom (by giving us lots of money to buy very expensive and deadly toys).
I think the solution to this problem - is to continue on the path we've been on for the past 70+ years, and spread freedom throughout the world. I, for one, believe that the recent setbacks in freedom in the US are temporary, and will go away as soon as the negative impact is seen - and as soon as countries who ARE currently more free prove it, once again. If countries like Saudi Arabia had true freedom, then maybe there'd be more open political discourse, and their people would hate the Saudi govenment (as they *should*) instead of the US, and they'll be flying passenger jets into their buildings instead (as they should *NOT*).
The problem is, that just like in the "HTML Programmer" industry - the labor is in such high demand, that they'll hire just about anybody, and frequently, you'll end up with someone incompetent. I'd say it's probably a lot easier to "pretend" to be a good CEO than it is to "pretend" to be a good "HTML Programmer".
If you look at some of the brainless decisions many CEO's make, the poor choices, and the finger pointing, you can tell that there are a lot of people who have the position of "CEO" who don't really deserve it on merits. They have it on the virtue of being golfing buddies with the board members - and board members have their jobs on the virtue of being descended from someone who was rich enough to be a stock holder. More often than not.
If the most creative thing a CEO can come up with for a cash crunch is - fire a bunch of people, and deny them severance - then they're NOT really a very good CEO. Not very smart, and not deserving of a six or seven figure salary (plus zillions of stock options). The most important component of leadership is earning trust. Mass layoffs do not earn trust. True leaders don't betray the led. Tyrants do.
Other apologists have said that the CEOs and other captains of industry take all the risks, and therefore deserve the rewards. That's bullshit. Very few CEOs retire to the homeless shelter if their business collapses. But many of their former employees do. I'd say that the normal working guy is taking a much bigger risk by relying on the board members' favorite golfing buddy to run their company - because if HE fucks up, he gets the golden parachute, and the normal working guy gets kicked to the curb.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because Clinton got a blow job, does not mean that there isn't really a vast right-wing conspiracy. . .
but then again, the scriptures say Pi=3, so what's the point? You either have to bend reality to accept that belief (that circles are hexagons), or you have to accept scriptural fallability. If you accept scriptural fallability, a whole lot of other things collapse with it. Unfortunately. Maintaining a belief in the Divine does not require belief in scriptural infallability - but it does make it awful hard to justify things like, church, and observance of religious laws, and the portrayed history of the OT-era.
other plantes wouldn't have the slightest impact on overcrowding. Until we figured out how to move BILLIONS of people off the planet, cheaper than we could kill them.
And even if we did trim the population from say, 10 billion, back down to 6 or so - wouldn't it be a very short while before we were back up to 10 again?
Face it - the ONLY hope of easing overcrowding is population control. And there are only TWO ways to control population. A strong totalitarian government, or (apparently) global industrialization. Or, I suppose the old standby's, war, plague, famine.
I would think that such a planet would probably never get any meteor impacts. What could get past those gas giants? However, look at the perturbations that would be caused by passing that innner gas-giant every year (gas-giant's year) - the planet would have a stable orbit, but HOW stable? And would it be stable enough to maintain a normal climate? Or would they be innundated with alternating hothouse and ice age conditions? And is the inner gas-giant close enough to cause tidal forces (and strong geothermal/volcanic activity?)
Whatever would evolve on that world would likely be one tough sonofabitch.
Only some quirks of Earth's formation and evolution (mainly the presence of the moon) give us an atmosphere thin enough to let our type of climate and our type of life exist.
Interesting. Could you elaborate on this? (which quirks? how does the moon fit in to this?
Look up "Veritas" in the dictionary. :)
It was 8 years ago, and companies were DESPERATE for anyone who knew how to turn a computer on.
My salary went from $18k to $40k that year. Although with the raise, I was also offered a new position, a promotion, so there were none of the shortcomings, like being the tall-blade when the lawnmower came.
I still have that job, and I'm making over $70k (plus stock options) today, and have survived three acquisitions (the company was acquired) and god knows how many layoffs.
In today's climate, I sure as hell wouldn't risk it. It's also a very different company. When I accepted the counter-offer, there were like 100 employees, and I was on a first name basis with the senior staff, including the CEO.
Now, there's a couple orders of magnitude more employees, I've never been to the company headquarters, and never met anyone above Director level. I can trust MY manager, but I don't trust HER manager, and I sure as hell don't trust the CEO. I hear he cheats at golf. Totally different culture, different set of risks. And this is really the main factor you should be looking at.
Veritas has MANY products, and most of them were acquired, so they have very different roots/architecture. NB Pro has almost nothing in common with BE except the open file manager and licensing. (in fact, NB Pro has very little in common with NBU, their other tape backup software).
Download an eval and try it.
Veritas NetBackup Professional. Screw tape. tape sucks.
regulated by whom? Who's golfing buddy is that?
argh - didn't see Muppet Treasure Island where Kermit fights LJS (Tim Curry) in the same manner - flipping jumping, only two cutlasses. . .
I thought that the face plate was going to explode, and underneath you'd see Luke's face.
the cane?
naw, that's like my senile old grandmother who pretends she's deaf so she doesn't have to engage in conversations with people she doesn't like, and so that people feel sorry for her. Conniving old bat.
EP II = 1000 years.
EP IV = 1000 generations.
GL = carelessly inconsistent.
And what do you think is useful? Monkey style? I hate to tell you this but Aikido people were the ones kicking most of the ass in Ulitmate Fighting. Gracy was an Aikido guy.
Reach is fine and dandy, but speed and power win out. In the REAL world, very few matches are going to occur where one person outclasses another in speed and power enough to make a difference. In a fantasy world, where you've got the Force Mastery and all dat, it could easily make a difference.
That said, I'd like to add;
a WISE fighter uses his opponent's strength against him. Isn't Yoda a WISE character?
The lack of wisdom in the jumping and flipping has been talked about.
How could Yoda have used his lack of reach to his advantage?
Yoda can reach targets on Dooku's body, that Dooku can't easily defend, by virtue of height. And as funny as it may sound, attacking Dooku's shins and ankles would have been excellent strategy, and I really wish that the fight choreographers had thought of that - instead of feeding us the same mad jumping screaming and flipping that the martial arts "industry" has been feeding us since Bruce Lee and before.
Once Yoda had a good hit on an ankle, Dooku would be crippled, and a much easier target.
Here's another example of why AOTC's portrayal was just plain WRONG.
Remember ESB, when Luke and Vader squared off? For much of the fight, Vader was calm, didn't do a lot of gymnastics, and even fought one-handed - compared to Luke's balls out two handed sweating grunting fighting. Luke was obviously totally outclassed, and Vader fought with. . . dignity. Superiority. He was schooling Luke. That was how Yoda vs. Dooku should have been treated. In fact, had I scripted it, I would have had Dooku lose a foot, and he could still have narrowly escaped with the same trick (though I would have made the tumbling object MUCH larger, because Yoda should not have had any problems moving that silly little beam).
Wow. Look how far we've come since the Magna Carta.
Little known fact:
The recent Queen of the Kingdom of the West - was denied entry to the US (she's an Australian Citizen - just happens to be the chick that King Uthar is dating) post 9/11.
Suspected ties to subversives is the rumored reason for denial. She isn't applying for citizenship - just a temporary visa so she can hang out for 6 months and be queen.
They didn't toss hundreds of thousands of baby boomers into prison for smoking a joint. That honor is reserved for THIS generation.
(while pot WAS illegal back then, they certainly did not enforce it with the volume and vigor that they've been using for the past 20 years.)
Sure the hippies of the 60's got hassled by the man a lot. But MY generation is downright opressed in comparison. Nobody should wonder why we don't speak out.
- -
I agree that content providers should be paid via the fee that the home user pays to his or her ISP, but then - how do you enforce that. And in the end, aren't we talking about the MSN/AOL model? Didn't that model largely fail? (compuserve, prodigy, etc) - If most internet users belong to MSN or AOL, then they're paying for special premium content, but they're also taking advantage of the large amount of FREE content. Which is ultimately going away.
Anyone who doesn't realize that NEW CARS ARE FOR SUCKERS - is a sucker.
They lose 30-40% of their value when you drive them off the lot - and - the dealership wasn't really interested in selling you a car in the first place. Car dealers don't sell cars. They sell financing.
I haven't bought a new car in over 10 years. Old used cars get you to work and back - what more do you need? I've had a 1991 Volvo 240 that I bought two years ago for $5000. Cash. It's safe, gets 25 mpg, and reliable as hell. It's not rusted out, the interior isn't worn, though the styling isn't that great. Also, VERY easy to work on.
Last new car I did buy was an Acura Integra, and that actually was a very nice car, gave me zero trouble for 5 years. These people buying crap cars amaze me. The idiots buying Ford Focus - what don't you watch the news? You're paying $500/mo for a tiny, unsafe econobox that's had 8 recalls? Idiots.
crime? In the UK? I thought you blokes were safe since you outlawed guns.
For those who complain of the 3000+ (unverified) "innocent civilians" killed in the US Bombing in Afghanistan - it would be good to think about the 50,000 that were slaughtered by their own people in the power vacuum after the Soviets pulled out. SOMEONE has to rule and be in power, otherwise you're going to have a zillion bullies fighting over their square mile of turf, not giving a shit who gets killed in the crossfire. Believe it or not, most Americans DO care that innocent civilians were killed, and don't view it as any kind of "payback". We view it as an improvement over the situation when the last government left power.
So, you're saying that any time some whack-job lights off a bomb or crashes a plane into a building, we should just roll over and do what they ask?
You define "terrorism" quite loosely, and in fact, I think you're probably buying into the semi-compelling bin Laden propaganda.
If someone straps on a military uniform, has a rank, and follows orders, orders to go and kill people for whatever reason - that's not terrorism. It's war.
If someone wearing street clothes walks into a crowded mall and detonates a bomb, sacrificing themselves for the mere purpose of deception in order to optimize delivery - that person is a criminal and a murderer, no matter how many screaming zealots claim they're a martyr. And THAT, my friend is Terrorism. It is not civilized, it should not be accepted, and it is totally different than enforcing policy through military violence. One has accountability, the other does not.
In Vietnam - whether you want to believe it or not, a lot of people in the government and the military caught a lot of heat over our actions in southeast asia. In fact, it cause a huge political schism in this country - which is a legacy that continues to that day. The soldiers wore uniforms with name tags. Their officers had jobs and were known to the public. The political leaders were subject to electoral votes to keep their jobs. THAT'S accountability.
In Palestine, a bunch of guys sneak around and anonymously plan and support the bombers. Nobody stands up with a backbone and claims responsibility for the bombings. They spinelessly whine and say: oh -that's YOUR fault, for your policies. Their "leaders" promise that they'll try to stop the attacks and the attacks go on. Clearly this is not a leader. Just a person waving papers, distracting us from who we should really be dealing with. Then they march in parades with masks covering their faces.
In the US, we outlawed people who marched in parades wearing white masks. Same guys who used to have parties late at night with burning crosses, and lynchings. That's the kind of people we're dealing with here. Spinless cowards who won't stand up and face the consequences of their actions, who back up their actions with a name. The only ones who are known by name (the leaders) shun responsibility and say that "oh, it wasn't me, I didn't give them money for the explosives, I only told them that the US is evil. It's not my fault they blew up your embassy - must be yours for being evil.
Well FUCK that. And FUCK them.
I agree. I'm as big an NWO conspiracy theory nut as anyone. But if Jar Jar Bush had wanted to put this country under Martial Law - he'd have done it on September 12th. Hell, I would have done it, and I'm not a megalomaniac.
Obviously, it would be STUPID to have put the US under martial law - or to do it today, or any time in the future, because our strength is our economy, and Martial Law would kill that. I think that's the main philosophical component of US Republican thought: it's our FREEDOM which makes our economy strong, (stronger than those other slackers over there), and our economy which defends our freedom (by giving us lots of money to buy very expensive and deadly toys).
I think the solution to this problem - is to continue on the path we've been on for the past 70+ years, and spread freedom throughout the world. I, for one, believe that the recent setbacks in freedom in the US are temporary, and will go away as soon as the negative impact is seen - and as soon as countries who ARE currently more free prove it, once again. If countries like Saudi Arabia had true freedom, then maybe there'd be more open political discourse, and their people would hate the Saudi govenment (as they *should*) instead of the US, and they'll be flying passenger jets into their buildings instead (as they should *NOT*).
The problem is, that just like in the "HTML Programmer" industry - the labor is in such high demand, that they'll hire just about anybody, and frequently, you'll end up with someone incompetent. I'd say it's probably a lot easier to "pretend" to be a good CEO than it is to "pretend" to be a good "HTML Programmer".
If you look at some of the brainless decisions many CEO's make, the poor choices, and the finger pointing, you can tell that there are a lot of people who have the position of "CEO" who don't really deserve it on merits. They have it on the virtue of being golfing buddies with the board members - and board members have their jobs on the virtue of being descended from someone who was rich enough to be a stock holder. More often than not.
If the most creative thing a CEO can come up with for a cash crunch is - fire a bunch of people, and deny them severance - then they're NOT really a very good CEO. Not very smart, and not deserving of a six or seven figure salary (plus zillions of stock options). The most important component of leadership is earning trust. Mass layoffs do not earn trust. True leaders don't betray the led. Tyrants do.
Other apologists have said that the CEOs and other captains of industry take all the risks, and therefore deserve the rewards. That's bullshit. Very few CEOs retire to the homeless shelter if their business collapses. But many of their former employees do. I'd say that the normal working guy is taking a much bigger risk by relying on the board members' favorite golfing buddy to run their company - because if HE fucks up, he gets the golden parachute, and the normal working guy gets kicked to the curb.