You don't have to make anyone into a boogieman and you don't have to prevent providers from offering premium services. You just need to make sure that people get the bandwidth they pay for.
If a content provider pays for the bandwidth to serve 10,000 people downloading at 500kb each, then 10,000 people should be able to download at that rate (assuming they have paid for a 500kb connection).
It is the responsibility of the provider to ensure that they have fat enough pipes to meet their obligations. If they want to create and sell fatter pipes on top of that, then they should be free to do so, as long as they can meet thir current obligations.
By definition, a discussion on Slashdot is anything but accurate and about as important as a discussion of Brittany Spears' underwear (or lack thereof)
There is one aspect of COBOL that I have never seen bested by any language; the ability to slice and dice a record, move it around, copy it, redefine data types as needed, etc.
And as for maintaining, a properly written COBOL program has no equal in ease of understanding what the heck it is doing to what.
The reason the ratings are failing is that every week, the Humans lose. They may win a battle now and then , but it's always in the wider context of getting their butts kicked.
Contrast this with the Star Trek series. In those, the Humans always kicked ass.
All arguments about art/life/etc. aside, no one likes to see their team running away at the end of every episode.
In 1984 this study was done in Canada. The first page kind of says it all.
" Between 1959 and 1974 a total of 48sqkm calved off from Milne and Ayles ice shelves. In addition, the Ayles Ice Shelf moved about 5km out into Ayles Ford"
Not quite 66 sqkm but close. And it sounds as if the shelf broke off rather recently within a few decades, and somehow reattached itself. No mention of that in the story, but there is a significant emphasis that the ice is 3000 years old and ancient. Making it seem as if this has been the same for 3000 years. Next at the bottom left of the first page.
"The largest observed ice calving occurred at Ward Hunt Ice Shelf (just north of Ayles) where almost 600SQKM, broke off between 1961 and 1962.
I would suggest that you, not I or others would fit better in a fascist society where opposing opinions are brutally suppressed. The Administration merely prevent two of its former employees from publishing something. The essentials of what they wanted to publish are now common knowledge.
You can fault them for not being very PR savvy, but they *did* work the Administration and the Administration *does* have the legal right to do what they did. Perhaps you would feel better if Bush went into the Times building and stuffed the documents down his pants. I guess that's your approved way of suppressing information.
My argument is that the New York Times and its allies believe anything the Bush Administration does is a crime, that crime being that they are not Democrats, Liberals, Leftists, Communists, etc.
They therefore feel free to publish anything, no matter how damaging it is to the U.S. and its efforts.
All I can say is it's a good thing I didn't say I was a Global Warming skeptic. You probably would have hunted me down and murdered me (like you seem to advocate).
Yes, I'd say you would be the one more comfortable in a country where slashing the throat of the opposition and ensuring that your ideas were the only one's allowed is the way to go.
Irrationality and hate drools from your mouth, please use a handkerchief.
So mean spirited for a Leftie.
Oh, and read all the posts regarding my original post and you will find an example. Sorry, it's only one because I've not the time or inclination to archive everything I read just so when some idiot wants "proof" I can cite. It's the internet, deal with it. Something tells me you wouldn't listen anyway.
Democrats, Liberals, whatever you want to call them are not about trusting the government. They are about controlling it. They are control freaks that hate what they can't control.
And remember, it's hard to trust anyone when your throat is slit or you plane is blown up.
After the battle of Midway, some dumbass editor in the midwest, can't remember which, reported that the key to winning was the breaking of the Japanese code.
Think about it. Every Administration makes mistakes. Many things they do can be misinterpreted by reporters and editors than have shown by emprical evidence to be not so bright. Regardless, they should all think...what good will come of this being published in this time of war? Will this help our effort to WIN? If not, then take a little responsibility and make some of that shared sacrafice they all keep whining about and DON'T PUBLISH!
If you think they should publish everything without regard to its impact on our effort to win, well...fuck you asshole. Hopefully, yours will be the first throat some asswipe, islamofacist cuts.
Look at just one incident. Abu Ghrab (or however it's spelled). When this was published, the culprits had already been identified, removed from the prison and were facing charges. The fact that this information was published accomplished nothing as far as policy change goes because the policy change was already made.
Let's look at what it did do. It horrified the public and embarressed the administration. Both goals at the top the list for outlets like the New York Times. Something that is also somewhat defensable in the political arena.
What it also did was weaken support for the war, embolden the insurgency, and diminished America's standing in the world. Are these goals of the New York Times? Do they want a peaceful and stable Iraq? Who knows. They keep doing things that help the radical islamists in term of propaganda. Do you think Bin Laudin is an idiot? They have made clear that they understand the lessons of Vietname and that if you weaken the resolve of America, they can win. Is that good for the the U.S? For the World?
If you are the New York Times, then the answer is yes. "Pinch", the owner of the Times as much as said so on several occasions. He would rather see an America soldier shot than a terriorist. Look it up. I suspect to that many of the people on DU and KOS would have the same opinion. I'm sorry, but that makes them scum as far as I'm concerned.
The Real Problem is that the New York Times insists on publishing again and again secrets that ultimately end up damaging the U.S.
You may argue that they are just publishing what the public has the "right to know", but they are actually censoring some opinions in favor of their own. So they are publishing what the New York Times wants the public to know.
Discussion and arguments of policy is fine and it should be discussed in a fair, open, and rational way.
I submit that when the New York Times, or most other media outlets, publish information, the discussion they present is anything but fair and rational, and since they often give only token space to opposing viewpoints, it is not very open either.
One thing these people need to understand is that their right to publish these things is guaranteed by the U.S Government. Not the U.N. not by the UE, or anyone else. When they publish information that causes harm to the U.S. in their zeal in pursing their partisan agenda, they are actually weakening the very institution that guarantees their rights.
There is considerable debate over the existence of a God
Actually, there is no debate among the faithful (whichever faith) about there being a God.
Faith has nothing to do with science. Science has nothing to do with faith.
Faith is the belief in something that cannot be shown to be true by science. Science is the belief that nothing is true that cannot be proven to be true.
If you use science to "prove" tenants of your faith, then it is no longer a faith, but a fact. And where is the nobility in believing in a fact?
You could put 20 million people in 20 million single family homes in just N&S Dakota and not even make a dent in the open land. No reason to invade Canada.
Slashdot Mirror
You don't have to make anyone into a boogieman and you don't have to prevent providers from offering premium services. You just need to make sure that people get the bandwidth they pay for.
If a content provider pays for the bandwidth to serve 10,000 people downloading at 500kb each, then 10,000 people should be able to download at that rate (assuming they have paid for a 500kb connection).
It is the responsibility of the provider to ensure that they have fat enough pipes to meet their obligations. If they want to create and sell fatter pipes on top of that, then they should be free to do so, as long as they can meet thir current obligations.
"discussion where accurate data is critical?"
By definition, a discussion on Slashdot is anything but accurate and about as important as a discussion of Brittany Spears' underwear (or lack thereof)
So do you dispute his assertion? If so, why? Poke holes in his argument.
Don't just fall back on the Global Warming Mantra of Corprations and Republicans are Evil.
I don't know. If GM does a VFD and the IGBT can't keep up with the CELL and AC, then DC is SOL.
MOD FUN JAL wLOA.
There is one aspect of COBOL that I have never seen bested by any language; the ability to slice and dice a record, move it around, copy it, redefine data types as needed, etc.
And as for maintaining, a properly written COBOL program has no equal in ease of understanding what the heck it is doing to what.
...from the last time the ice melted.
The reason the ratings are failing is that every week, the Humans lose. They may win a battle now and then , but it's always in the wider context of getting their butts kicked.
Contrast this with the Star Trek series. In those, the Humans always kicked ass.
All arguments about art/life/etc. aside, no one likes to see their team running away at the end of every episode.
Maybe he should have worked there longer. Follow this link.
. pdf
http://pubs.aina.ucalgary.ca/arctic/Arctic39-1-15
In 1984 this study was done in Canada. The first page kind of says it all.
" Between 1959 and 1974 a total of 48sqkm calved off from Milne and Ayles ice shelves. In addition, the Ayles Ice Shelf moved about 5km out into Ayles Ford"
Not quite 66 sqkm but close. And it sounds as if the shelf broke off rather recently within a few decades, and somehow reattached itself. No mention of that in the story, but there is a significant emphasis that the ice is 3000 years old and ancient. Making it seem as if this has been the same for 3000 years. Next at the bottom left of the first page.
"The largest observed ice calving occurred at Ward Hunt Ice Shelf (just north of Ayles) where almost 600SQKM, broke off between 1961 and 1962.
Apparently, someone will be going to Jail and Steve Jobs will be losing a boat load of money.
for P0rn?
I would suggest that you, not I or others would fit better in a fascist society where opposing opinions are brutally suppressed. The Administration merely prevent two of its former employees from publishing something. The essentials of what they wanted to publish are now common knowledge.
You can fault them for not being very PR savvy, but they *did* work the Administration and the Administration *does* have the legal right to do what they did. Perhaps you would feel better if Bush went into the Times building and stuffed the documents down his pants. I guess that's your approved way of suppressing information.
My argument is that the New York Times and its allies believe anything the Bush Administration does is a crime, that crime being that they are not Democrats, Liberals, Leftists, Communists, etc.
They therefore feel free to publish anything, no matter how damaging it is to the U.S. and its efforts.
All I can say is it's a good thing I didn't say I was a Global Warming skeptic. You probably would have hunted me down and murdered me (like you seem to advocate).
Yes, I'd say you would be the one more comfortable in a country where slashing the throat of the opposition and ensuring that your ideas were the only one's allowed is the way to go.
I believe this happened to Gilligan's Island.. The Professor said so!
Irrationality and hate drools from your mouth, please use a handkerchief.
So mean spirited for a Leftie.
Oh, and read all the posts regarding my original post and you will find an example. Sorry, it's only one because I've not the time or inclination to archive everything I read just so when some idiot wants "proof" I can cite. It's the internet, deal with it. Something tells me you wouldn't listen anyway.
Not undercover, no indictment returned, no issue, no point to your post.
"Name one you lying sack of shit."
This is what the Left calls discussion and reason. This is a perfect display of their Hate.
Democrats, Liberals, whatever you want to call them are not about trusting the government. They are about controlling it. They are control freaks that hate what they can't control.
And remember, it's hard to trust anyone when your throat is slit or you plane is blown up.
There a difference between openly dealing with your problem and obsessing over it in the obsessive, sadomasochistic, way the MSM did.
After the battle of Midway, some dumbass editor in the midwest, can't remember which, reported that the key to winning was the breaking of the Japanese code.
Think about it. Every Administration makes mistakes. Many things they do can be misinterpreted by reporters and editors than have shown by emprical evidence to be not so bright. Regardless, they should all think...what good will come of this being published in this time of war? Will this help our effort to WIN? If not, then take a little responsibility and make some of that shared sacrafice they all keep whining about and DON'T PUBLISH!
If you think they should publish everything without regard to its impact on our effort to win, well...fuck you asshole. Hopefully, yours will be the first throat some asswipe, islamofacist cuts.
Look at just one incident. Abu Ghrab (or however it's spelled). When this was published, the culprits had already been identified, removed from the prison and were facing charges. The fact that this information was published accomplished nothing as far as policy change goes because the policy change was already made.
Let's look at what it did do. It horrified the public and embarressed the administration. Both goals at the top the list for outlets like the New York Times. Something that is also somewhat defensable in the political arena.
What it also did was weaken support for the war, embolden the insurgency, and diminished America's standing in the world. Are these goals of the New York Times? Do they want a peaceful and stable Iraq? Who knows. They keep doing things that help the radical islamists in term of propaganda. Do you think Bin Laudin is an idiot? They have made clear that they understand the lessons of Vietname and that if you weaken the resolve of America, they can win. Is that good for the the U.S? For the World?
If you are the New York Times, then the answer is yes. "Pinch", the owner of the Times as much as said so on several occasions. He would rather see an America soldier shot than a terriorist. Look it up. I suspect to that many of the people on DU and KOS would have the same opinion. I'm sorry, but that makes them scum as far as I'm concerned.
The Real Problem is that the New York Times insists on publishing again and again secrets that ultimately end up damaging the U.S.
You may argue that they are just publishing what the public has the "right to know", but they are actually censoring some opinions in favor of their own. So they are publishing what the New York Times wants the public to know.
Discussion and arguments of policy is fine and it should be discussed in a fair, open, and rational way.
I submit that when the New York Times, or most other media outlets, publish information, the discussion they present is anything but fair and rational, and since they often give only token space to opposing viewpoints, it is not very open either.
One thing these people need to understand is that their right to publish these things is guaranteed by the U.S Government. Not the U.N. not by the UE, or anyone else. When they publish information that causes harm to the U.S. in their zeal in pursing their partisan agenda, they are actually weakening the very institution that guarantees their rights.
...fifteen looong seconds to list the contents of a folder.
I would suggest you look at the Gloal Warming issue. There, advocates have adopted all the trappings of religion.
Belief in an idea larger than yourself and that you can't ever really be sure is true is Noble.
Belief in the fact that water will boil at 212 degrees at sea level requires little effort.
There is considerable debate over the existence of a God
Actually, there is no debate among the faithful (whichever faith) about there being a God.
Faith has nothing to do with science. Science has nothing to do with faith.
Faith is the belief in something that cannot be shown to be true by science. Science is the belief that nothing is true that cannot be proven to be true.
If you use science to "prove" tenants of your faith, then it is no longer a faith, but a fact. And where is the nobility in believing in a fact?
Puleeeze,
You could put 20 million people in 20 million single family homes in just N&S Dakota and not even make a dent in the open land. No reason to invade Canada.