...except youth is too disinterested to demonstrate. The downward spiral continues.
Let's not forget that the demonstrations of the 60's were more about the draft than the war. The demonstrators were personally angry at being required to fight a war they did not believe in. Since there is no draft, no demonstrations. There is little personal involvement in the Iraq war outside of families of volunteers.
IMHO, the leaders of the country realize this and are loath to bring up the draft for this very reason, even though it could possibly provide enough troops to stabilize Iraq
> Ridley Scott's vision of Los Angeles always seemed amazingly futuristic and innovative to me until I went to live in Taiwan.
Boy you got that right. I'm a westerner who lives in Taiwan (now, not my whole life) and we westerners always remark to each other that we are living in Blade Runner world. Er... except for the flying cars.
>People don't want to listen to information. Information is like school, and school was boring, right? People want to be entertained, at best they can be convinced to sit through some spectacular show that gives them a few tidbits of "information" between the explosions and stunts.
Not me! I get my information from Slashdot comment sections!
>Any idiot can make friends -- but can you make some really serious enemies? >>his guy basically admits that he just likes making people mad.
Agreed. Also the statement is itself idiotic. It is definitely harder to make friends than enemies. As a wise person once said: "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate"
Unless someone was planning on applying for an extradition order against YouTube's servers, I don't see how anything that might have transpired along the banks of ye olde Thames could possibly have anything to do with an American law.
Hmm, that gives me a thought. Couldn't YouTube simply move their servers off shore and avoid all copyright problems? I mean, if American businesses can move offshore to avoid tax laws, why can't it work for copyright law? I'm probably missing something here though.
Blocking trading on a group of stocks that have already been pumped and dumped is futile
I don't understand this. Given that nobody will buy the stock until they recieve the email, the SEC could easily monitor the spam and shut down trading after they see it. I'm guessing they could be faster at stopping the trade than grandpa is in buying it. Or am I missing something?
Small indie labels really need some kind of recommendation system. Genres aren't enough. What really needs to happen is indie labels should band together and set up something like Pandora
Here's what I do. Rip internet music streams (Indie Pop Rocks is my favorite). I use a stream ripper program to hook up to a shoutcast station all night, which will put all the music in tidy mp3 files on my hard drive. Then I bring them up in iTunes and give them all two stars. I have a "Evaluation" smart playlist that shows me my recent two-star only music. When I have time to listen to music, I play the new stuff. As I listen, If I like a tune, I 3-star it (or more), which moves it out of the "Evaluation" playlist. If I don't like it, I remove the stars and it goes into a "Remove?" playlist. Later I dump the stuff I don't like, and use a "Recent >2*" playlist to play the recent stuff I like.
After deciding I really like a tune, I go buy it to get the higher quality.
I guarantee you that they would not go unpunished. The punishment in an anarchistic society could even be rather extreme. I'd kill you, and your entire family. Who would stop me?
Nobody would stop you, but the Shiite friend of the family would probably drill a hole in your head
Al doesn't believe it himself. It's not enough of a priority for Arianna. No, it's a means to a socio-political ends, nothing more. And the public is being hoodwinked.
Drastic measures aside, whether there is warming or not, I feel that reducing carbon emissions is a good thing anyway. Even if global warming is a hoax, it would not be a bad thing to stop pumping pollutants into the atmosphere.
OTOH, if you are using 'is' in a loose sense that is inclusive of 'was,' then he would've been lying, because at that time the affair had happened in the past, but wasn't happening any more.
So are there then four different permutations of the interpretation of Clinton's statement?
That depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is.
That depends on what the meaning of the word 'was' is.
That depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' was.
That depends on what the meaning of the word 'was' was.
all your research will be useless and futile against their nano-unions
Molocules can't unionize, they're just dumb molocules. However, the researches will have to deal with the legal dept. of the SPCM* after having forced them to do back-breaking labor.
As for the basic flow, there's basicly two kinds of tubes - those that move liquid through pressure (hydraulic), and those that move liquid through decent (drains, sewer pipes). Pressure doesn't make sense - I don't send packets and then have to sent more packets to push the first ones
Hmm, I was thinking the tube analogy was of the inter-office mail tubes of old (or at the drive thru bank window) that would send messages in enclosed packages by forced air to other offices. Not saying it wasn't water tubes, it's just I had a different picture in my head.
Not to mention that they're completely unusable by blind people.
I have an idea for this. Simply make the numbers "speak out" when you glide your finger over them. Maybe more obtrusive than using touch, but it could work. Also, speaking the names of contacts and songs as you scan lists would be possible.
people like me found the PC dude much more amusing and likeable than the scruffy, elitist asshole Mac guy?
But look at it another way. Consider if they had cast some real jerk into the role of PC. Essentially they would be insulting PC users. By casting a likeable friendly type, they are saying PC users are really OK Joes, and given the opportunity would like to have something better. I think it's a pretty savvy casting myself.
if I paid to read news for Oct 5th on a site, and I don't pay tomorrow, I can't go back and see the news for Oct 5th because it is behind access control.
You could always print or save the pages you viewed every day.
I think that the large market share for Microsoft arose basically because of fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of the different is how it got started - that's why the IBM PC got such a large market share. Microsoft just rode on IBM's coat-tails.
I agree, but it's more than that. It's also arrogance. Many people actually believe that Windows is an awsome system and all the rest suck. No joke. I've talked to many in management AND IN IT who scoff at other OSs (Oses?). They decry the lack of standards and bitch about having to deal with renegade Mac and Linux users. And there's more than that. Many of my friends think Bill Gates is someone to be admired. Especially my friends from China. They see him as somebody to be looked up to. He's smart and rich and famous. They buy Windows because it's the only (according to their view) thing that is right and real. I know it's sad, but I would guess that the majority of the population is convinced, not that Windows is an ugly monopoly, but that it is the only worthwhile thing to use.
I had a friend (USA) who was angry that the government was going after Bill Gates. I tried to convince him, to no avail, that the issue was that Mircrosoft had broken the law. He was enamored with Gate's success and thought it was just a conspiracy to punish that success. So yes, fear is there, but far greater is the admiration
In the UK, the market wouldn't stand for that - paperback textbooks at paperback prices are the norm
Can I just say, this makes porting the books around a hekuva lot eaiser too because they are lighter. The Chinese do it even one better. They break up their course books into seperate booklets, all in paperback so you are not carrying around an entire years worth of material with each book! This can make your backback about ten times lighter. Now, of course, a decent eletronic format could solve the rest of the weight problem. But it doesn't look like this is it.
I think they're just being polite saying "it isn't evidence of any superior schooling"
Good point. In many cultures it is polite to be self-deprecating and it is assumed that you really are that good. For example, in Chinese you almost never say you are good at something. You say Ma Ma Hoo Hoo, which means mediocre but is really just a backhanded way of agreeing. (Oddly, Ma Ma Hoo Hoo directly translated means Horse Horse Tiger Tiger. Why this means mediocre is anyone's guess).
As for this latest development, 5 feet per day?! Wow, that's pretty dang fast. I'd heard a new lava dome was growing, but this speed is certainly a new develpment. Still, it will take a long time to get back to its former size. Over 1,000 vertical feet of mountain got blown off the top, and most of one side slid away.
It's now 300 feet tall. So by your reckoning it will take (1000 - 300) / 5ft/day = 140 days. That should make it back to original height by late September. So I guess it's not that long.
There is NO evidence pointing toward a diety of any kind.
Once again, a complete dogmatic assertion of "truth". Since you know for a fact that there is no evidence for a God, I guess that clears up the whole argument. How is this different than the person that claims that all evidence for Evolution has been doctored up by the Evolutionists? Its simply a blanket assertion that upholds the person's pre-existing blind-faith belief.
I'm perfectly willing to listen to the arguments for evolution as are many who are willing to listen to arguments for God. As someone else posted earlier, the two need not be mutually exclusive. The issue I'm raising is concerning those who make blanket sweeping statements which do not add anything to the debate and the requisite smugness and judgementalism that comes along with it. In my opinion, it is not unreasonable to believe in evolution and it is also not unreasonable to believe in God. Many prominent scientists in history have come to the conclusion that a God exists so its not without merit (Not that this is a reason for believing in God but I argue that reasonable people can believe it and still be reasonable).
Sounds to me like you're deliberately abusing the word faith. As I understand it (and as I hear people around me use it) "faith" means "absolute belief regardless of proof."
Nope. Most theologians correctly pair faith and reason together as inextricably tied. Faith is not "absolute belief regardless of proof". Blind faith is "absolute belief regardless of proof". This idea of blind faith was not introduced until well after the enlightenment period by Søren Kierkegaard which he termed a "leap of faith" against reason. This is what many people now equate with any kind of religious faith, or any kind of faith in general, but it is not the traditional western view of faith. Perhaps now the term is charged with that meaning and may be why this debate is a little unclear.
Slashdot Mirror
Let's not forget that the demonstrations of the 60's were more about the draft than the war. The demonstrators were personally angry at being required to fight a war they did not believe in. Since there is no draft, no demonstrations. There is little personal involvement in the Iraq war outside of families of volunteers.
IMHO, the leaders of the country realize this and are loath to bring up the draft for this very reason, even though it could possibly provide enough troops to stabilize Iraq
> Ridley Scott's vision of Los Angeles always seemed amazingly futuristic and innovative to me until I went to live in Taiwan.
Boy you got that right. I'm a westerner who lives in Taiwan (now, not my whole life) and we westerners always remark to each other that we are living in Blade Runner world. Er... except for the flying cars.
>People don't want to listen to information. Information is like school, and school was boring, right? People want to be entertained, at best they can be convinced to sit through some spectacular show that gives them a few tidbits of "information" between the explosions and stunts. Not me! I get my information from Slashdot comment sections!
>Any idiot can make friends -- but can you make some really serious enemies?
>>his guy basically admits that he just likes making people mad.
Agreed. Also the statement is itself idiotic. It is definitely harder to make friends than enemies. As a wise person once said: "Friends come and go, but enemies accumulate"
Unless someone was planning on applying for an extradition order against YouTube's servers, I don't see how anything that might have transpired along the banks of ye olde Thames could possibly have anything to do with an American law.
Hmm, that gives me a thought. Couldn't YouTube simply move their servers off shore and avoid all copyright problems? I mean, if American businesses can move offshore to avoid tax laws, why can't it work for copyright law? I'm probably missing something here though.
Blocking trading on a group of stocks that have already been pumped and dumped is futile
I don't understand this. Given that nobody will buy the stock until they recieve the email, the SEC could easily monitor the spam and shut down trading after they see it. I'm guessing they could be faster at stopping the trade than grandpa is in buying it. Or am I missing something?
Small indie labels really need some kind of recommendation system. Genres aren't enough. What really needs to happen is indie labels should band together and set up something like Pandora
Here's what I do. Rip internet music streams (Indie Pop Rocks is my favorite). I use a stream ripper program to hook up to a shoutcast station all night, which will put all the music in tidy mp3 files on my hard drive. Then I bring them up in iTunes and give them all two stars. I have a "Evaluation" smart playlist that shows me my recent two-star only music. When I have time to listen to music, I play the new stuff. As I listen, If I like a tune, I 3-star it (or more), which moves it out of the "Evaluation" playlist. If I don't like it, I remove the stars and it goes into a "Remove?" playlist. Later I dump the stuff I don't like, and use a "Recent >2*" playlist to play the recent stuff I like.
After deciding I really like a tune, I go buy it to get the higher quality.
I guarantee you that they would not go unpunished. The punishment in an anarchistic society could even be rather extreme. I'd kill you, and your entire family. Who would stop me?
Nobody would stop you, but the Shiite friend of the family would probably drill a hole in your head
They will all be really bummed out when during their journey of centuries, somebody invents #1 and gets there ahead of them.
Al doesn't believe it himself. It's not enough of a priority for Arianna. No, it's a means to a socio-political ends, nothing more. And the public is being hoodwinked.
Drastic measures aside, whether there is warming or not, I feel that reducing carbon emissions is a good thing anyway. Even if global warming is a hoax, it would not be a bad thing to stop pumping pollutants into the atmosphere.
OTOH, if you are using 'is' in a loose sense that is inclusive of 'was,' then he would've been lying, because at that time the affair had happened in the past, but wasn't happening any more.
So are there then four different permutations of the interpretation of Clinton's statement?
Which one do you think he meant :-)
all your research will be useless and futile against their nano-unions
Molocules can't unionize, they're just dumb molocules. However, the researches will have to deal with the legal dept. of the SPCM* after having forced them to do back-breaking labor.
*It'll come to you
As for the basic flow, there's basicly two kinds of tubes - those that move liquid through pressure (hydraulic), and those that move liquid through decent (drains, sewer pipes). Pressure doesn't make sense - I don't send packets and then have to sent more packets to push the first ones
Hmm, I was thinking the tube analogy was of the inter-office mail tubes of old (or at the drive thru bank window) that would send messages in enclosed packages by forced air to other offices. Not saying it wasn't water tubes, it's just I had a different picture in my head.
Not to mention that they're completely unusable by blind people.
I have an idea for this. Simply make the numbers "speak out" when you glide your finger over them. Maybe more obtrusive than using touch, but it could work. Also, speaking the names of contacts and songs as you scan lists would be possible.
Good news: Ship goes really fast on air!
Bad news: It goes 'down'.
Hmmm, sounds like maybe somebody should develop a bubble bomb. Just make a giant bubble under your enemy's ship!
people like me found the PC dude much more amusing and likeable than the scruffy, elitist asshole Mac guy?
But look at it another way. Consider if they had cast some real jerk into the role of PC. Essentially they would be insulting PC users. By casting a likeable friendly type, they are saying PC users are really OK Joes, and given the opportunity would like to have something better. I think it's a pretty savvy casting myself.
Poverty is generally measured, not by how little you have, but by how much less you have than average.
If the average person in a communtiy cannot feed their family, I would still call that poverty.
if I paid to read news for Oct 5th on a site, and I don't pay tomorrow, I can't go back and see the news for Oct 5th because it is behind access control.
You could always print or save the pages you viewed every day.
I think that the large market share for Microsoft arose basically because of fear. Fear of the unknown, fear of the different is how it got started - that's why the IBM PC got such a large market share. Microsoft just rode on IBM's coat-tails.
I agree, but it's more than that. It's also arrogance. Many people actually believe that Windows is an awsome system and all the rest suck. No joke. I've talked to many in management AND IN IT who scoff at other OSs (Oses?). They decry the lack of standards and bitch about having to deal with renegade Mac and Linux users. And there's more than that. Many of my friends think Bill Gates is someone to be admired. Especially my friends from China. They see him as somebody to be looked up to. He's smart and rich and famous. They buy Windows because it's the only (according to their view) thing that is right and real. I know it's sad, but I would guess that the majority of the population is convinced, not that Windows is an ugly monopoly, but that it is the only worthwhile thing to use.
I had a friend (USA) who was angry that the government was going after Bill Gates. I tried to convince him, to no avail, that the issue was that Mircrosoft had broken the law. He was enamored with Gate's success and thought it was just a conspiracy to punish that success. So yes, fear is there, but far greater is the admiration
In the UK, the market wouldn't stand for that - paperback textbooks at paperback prices are the norm
Can I just say, this makes porting the books around a hekuva lot eaiser too because they are lighter. The Chinese do it even one better. They break up their course books into seperate booklets, all in paperback so you are not carrying around an entire years worth of material with each book! This can make your backback about ten times lighter. Now, of course, a decent eletronic format could solve the rest of the weight problem. But it doesn't look like this is it.
Apple has Battlefield 1942, but they don't have Battlefield 2.
Battlefield 2? Is that some kind of Roman Empire version of the game?
Yuk, Yuk.
I think they're just being polite saying "it isn't evidence of any superior schooling"
Good point. In many cultures it is polite to be self-deprecating and it is assumed that you really are that good. For example, in Chinese you almost never say you are good at something. You say Ma Ma Hoo Hoo, which means mediocre but is really just a backhanded way of agreeing. (Oddly, Ma Ma Hoo Hoo directly translated means Horse Horse Tiger Tiger. Why this means mediocre is anyone's guess).
As for this latest development, 5 feet per day?! Wow, that's pretty dang fast. I'd heard a new lava dome was growing, but this speed is certainly a new develpment. Still, it will take a long time to get back to its former size. Over 1,000 vertical feet of mountain got blown off the top, and most of one side slid away.
It's now 300 feet tall. So by your reckoning it will take (1000 - 300) / 5ft/day = 140 days. That should make it back to original height by late September. So I guess it's not that long.
Sorry, I just can't resist doing this stuff :-)
There is NO evidence pointing toward a diety of any kind.
Once again, a complete dogmatic assertion of "truth". Since you know for a fact that there is no evidence for a God, I guess that clears up the whole argument. How is this different than the person that claims that all evidence for Evolution has been doctored up by the Evolutionists? Its simply a blanket assertion that upholds the person's pre-existing blind-faith belief.
I'm perfectly willing to listen to the arguments for evolution as are many who are willing to listen to arguments for God. As someone else posted earlier, the two need not be mutually exclusive. The issue I'm raising is concerning those who make blanket sweeping statements which do not add anything to the debate and the requisite smugness and judgementalism that comes along with it. In my opinion, it is not unreasonable to believe in evolution and it is also not unreasonable to believe in God. Many prominent scientists in history have come to the conclusion that a God exists so its not without merit (Not that this is a reason for believing in God but I argue that reasonable people can believe it and still be reasonable).
Sounds to me like you're deliberately abusing the word faith. As I understand it (and as I hear people around me use it) "faith" means "absolute belief regardless of proof."
Nope. Most theologians correctly pair faith and reason together as inextricably tied. Faith is not "absolute belief regardless of proof". Blind faith is "absolute belief regardless of proof". This idea of blind faith was not introduced until well after the enlightenment period by Søren Kierkegaard which he termed a "leap of faith" against reason. This is what many people now equate with any kind of religious faith, or any kind of faith in general, but it is not the traditional western view of faith. Perhaps now the term is charged with that meaning and may be why this debate is a little unclear.