Why is it acceptable to say that guys drive cool cars because they have small penises? Would it be ok to say that women get nice handbags because they have small vaginas?
Not being familiar with the idea, and steadfastly refusing to read the article, I'd imagine that it wouldn't be hard for them to include a wifi access point in the terminal, as it probably needs access as well. Could cause a potential conflict with both sides of the request coming from the same IP, but it's all things you can work out.
The first time I read the headline I skipped over Tor, and interpreted it as vehicular traffic, thinking that there must have been a botnet preventing people from telecommuting meaning that they were all driving to work.
Sometimes people do indeed use a phrase correctly. You don't make yourself sound smart by shooting it down every time. We know from his comment that he's already murdered his wife at least once, an answer to a question that nobody would have thought to ask.
I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will be judged not by the color of their skin but by the contents of their IP portfolio. Where they can use their last name to profit from my legacy.
Are automotive industries included in "all enterprises"? It doesn't matter whether you're trying to make a point about cars or anything else. You're taking a doomsday scenario from a hundred years ago, which we can all see hasn't happened. Robots build cars, people buy them. Robots build a bunch of other things too, which can be bought by people. The experiment worked for Ford, why should it not work for the rest of us?
We can see how big a problem this is by the fact that all car manufacturers using robots have floundered, while only the marques hand building their cars have survived.
I don't have time to give you a history lesson right now but here are the basics: 1. Replacing horses with cars may have been a good idea, but the engines were already in use for other purposes. 2. Steam engines were based on pressure cookers. 3. In some parts of the world oil is close enough to the surface that is seeps above the ground for people to notice that it burns.
No one is claiming that there aren't any examples of people making leaps of technology, but they all start out simpler, easier to imagine. Remember when the iPod came out and us geeks were talking about how it was nothing special. Remember how it exploded and made mp3s popular. In 100 years, people will be talking about how the iPod was a revolutionary idea, and someone else will be countering them with arguments of existing mp3 players.
Similar to the fact that in various first person shooter games, you will not be credited with a headshot unless there is a live pilot within your bullet.
"Only" two. Why is it that the US claims to be the best country in the world, but it comfortable sharing a list mainly populated by other shining examples of leading countries, such as North Korea, Thailand and Rwanda?
Why should access to steroids be limited because they're banned in some sports leagues. If I want to take some steroids because I think they'd help me, why should the fact that other people aren't allowed to take them stop me?
Automatic transmissions are banned in a lot of auto racing series, should we ban them for normal cars too?
Stop throwing ridiculous hyperbole around. Using less power does not mean an immediate return to the stone age. It just means using less power, and using what you do use more efficiently. Think of power like money. You need to save for retirement, but that doesn't mean that you never spend money on something that isn't entirely necessary for your survival. Sometimes you might go out to eat, or buy a new video game, or whatever, but you're always thinking about how much it costs, and whether it's really worth that price. Same with power, we'll keep using power, but we'll think about how much we're using, and try to keep within our "budget."
Well, the US (and I'd imagine any other country using nuclear power) also has badly inspected, badly maintained, badly regulated and overdue for decommissioning power plants. It's just that we've been lucky so far and none of them have gone china syndrome yet. I do include the "yet" there as it is only a matter of time. No one is pretending that it isn't a problem. Most pro-nuclear people want to build new plants with better designs and shut-down these old things making the whole nuclear industry look bad.
Oh, they weren't protesting a film, they were just attacking an embassy and murdering the people within. I see your point, they are indeed a peaceful people.
Have there been any documented attacks on people revealed in Manning's leaks? It's such a high profile issue that I'd imagine there would have been a lot of reports on it by now, but I haven't seen any.
We are at a point in history and in society where people are using their "beliefs" to further their ends of oppressing people who are not attempting to do harm to anyone. We are at a point where we are expected to "respect" other's beliefs even when those beliefs run directly counter to what can be observed by the naked eye, even when the exercise of those beliefs would cause harm to those in the immediate vicinity.
Like I said, skimming through to find the part which agrees with the argument you wanted to make anyway.
I'm glad to see you read comments the same way you read the bible: skimming through to find the bit you wanted to see, while ignoring the rest which would invalidate your point.
Slashdot Mirror
Why is it acceptable to say that guys drive cool cars because they have small penises? Would it be ok to say that women get nice handbags because they have small vaginas?
Would you please inform us, as I appear to be under the same delusion.
Probably shortly after he buys you a new car?
Not being familiar with the idea, and steadfastly refusing to read the article, I'd imagine that it wouldn't be hard for them to include a wifi access point in the terminal, as it probably needs access as well. Could cause a potential conflict with both sides of the request coming from the same IP, but it's all things you can work out.
The first time I read the headline I skipped over Tor, and interpreted it as vehicular traffic, thinking that there must have been a botnet preventing people from telecommuting meaning that they were all driving to work.
When I say "I would that" it means "I'd hit that". Actually most things I say mean that...
Sometimes people do indeed use a phrase correctly. You don't make yourself sound smart by shooting it down every time. We know from his comment that he's already murdered his wife at least once, an answer to a question that nobody would have thought to ask.
I have a dream, that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will be judged not by the color of their skin but by the contents of their IP portfolio. Where they can use their last name to profit from my legacy.
Haven't used MS-DOS since 1990. No one cares. Joke is still funny.
That's what the things we call "standard deviations" are for.
Kind of like if you're using an AC electrical system the voltage is always changing, so it's impossible to know what the voltage is.
Are automotive industries included in "all enterprises"? It doesn't matter whether you're trying to make a point about cars or anything else. You're taking a doomsday scenario from a hundred years ago, which we can all see hasn't happened. Robots build cars, people buy them. Robots build a bunch of other things too, which can be bought by people. The experiment worked for Ford, why should it not work for the rest of us?
We can see how big a problem this is by the fact that all car manufacturers using robots have floundered, while only the marques hand building their cars have survived.
I don't have time to give you a history lesson right now but here are the basics:
1. Replacing horses with cars may have been a good idea, but the engines were already in use for other purposes.
2. Steam engines were based on pressure cookers.
3. In some parts of the world oil is close enough to the surface that is seeps above the ground for people to notice that it burns.
No one is claiming that there aren't any examples of people making leaps of technology, but they all start out simpler, easier to imagine. Remember when the iPod came out and us geeks were talking about how it was nothing special. Remember how it exploded and made mp3s popular. In 100 years, people will be talking about how the iPod was a revolutionary idea, and someone else will be countering them with arguments of existing mp3 players.
Similar to the fact that in various first person shooter games, you will not be credited with a headshot unless there is a live pilot within your bullet.
"Only" two. Why is it that the US claims to be the best country in the world, but it comfortable sharing a list mainly populated by other shining examples of leading countries, such as North Korea, Thailand and Rwanda?
Why should access to steroids be limited because they're banned in some sports leagues. If I want to take some steroids because I think they'd help me, why should the fact that other people aren't allowed to take them stop me?
Automatic transmissions are banned in a lot of auto racing series, should we ban them for normal cars too?
Stop throwing ridiculous hyperbole around. Using less power does not mean an immediate return to the stone age. It just means using less power, and using what you do use more efficiently. Think of power like money. You need to save for retirement, but that doesn't mean that you never spend money on something that isn't entirely necessary for your survival. Sometimes you might go out to eat, or buy a new video game, or whatever, but you're always thinking about how much it costs, and whether it's really worth that price. Same with power, we'll keep using power, but we'll think about how much we're using, and try to keep within our "budget."
Well, the US (and I'd imagine any other country using nuclear power) also has badly inspected, badly maintained, badly regulated and overdue for decommissioning power plants. It's just that we've been lucky so far and none of them have gone china syndrome yet. I do include the "yet" there as it is only a matter of time. No one is pretending that it isn't a problem. Most pro-nuclear people want to build new plants with better designs and shut-down these old things making the whole nuclear industry look bad.
Oh, they weren't protesting a film, they were just attacking an embassy and murdering the people within. I see your point, they are indeed a peaceful people.
Yes, the Denon cable reviews are funny, but the 55 gallon drum of lubricant beats them all by miles.
Have there been any documented attacks on people revealed in Manning's leaks? It's such a high profile issue that I'd imagine there would have been a lot of reports on it by now, but I haven't seen any.
We are at a point in history and in society where people are using their "beliefs" to further their ends of oppressing people who are not attempting to do harm to anyone. We are at a point where we are expected to "respect" other's beliefs even when those beliefs run directly counter to what can be observed by the naked eye, even when the exercise of those beliefs would cause harm to those in the immediate vicinity.
Like I said, skimming through to find the part which agrees with the argument you wanted to make anyway.
That's not really the point of a laptop battery. Also, doesn't leaving it plugged in all the time kill the battery faster than anything?
I'm glad to see you read comments the same way you read the bible: skimming through to find the bit you wanted to see, while ignoring the rest which would invalidate your point.