This is slightly off-topic, but from all the names they could have given the damn thing, why give it a bizarre name like that? As if particle physics weren't confusing already...
But as long as they are actively taking measures to enforce the use of a specific browser, why enforce the use of the worst modern browser out there? Ease of support may be used as an argument, but it certainly isn't a valid reason to push IE instead of, say, Google Chrome or Firefox. If you're going to push a standard, push a good one.
Of course, they have a deal with the vendor of the crap standard, so there you have it.
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
Actually, since they kill people for their resources and make up damned lies to support that they're pretty much in line with the Old Testament.Not to mention the traditional Christian values of sexism, racism and homophobia that they promote so well.
Just because your personal definition of a word is less encompassing doesn't mean that Dubya wasn't a christian. It's a fair wager that every pope in history was a christian, but the Crusades and the Inquisition were their doings. Believing in the bible doesn't equate to being a good person.
And it's in the name of Capitalism that Texans want to teach biblical creationism in public schools; and it's because of Capitalism that George Bush Senior said that atheists shouldn't be allowed to vote.
Capitalism is also the reason USA money has "In God We Trust" printed on the bills instead of, say "In Money We Trust" at the door of every church and synagogue.
* Asserts patent infringement claims against non-copiers or against a large industry that is composed of non-copiers
This fits closely. Besides, why did they wait 10 years to file this suit? I'll tell you why: There is no patent infringement, but XEROX is looking for an easy settlement to fatten the piggy bank.
I recognize their historical importance in IT, but the past is past. Whoever is calling their shots now is acting like a patent troll. This isn't the first time, either.
Given the completely ignorant approach the Legislative and Judiciary powers in the United States of Jeebus have taken to the Internet, I am not surprised that the Executive power is also doing it wrong.
Not really. What his statement makes clear is that the show is presenting opinions, and not (alleged) facts, and that he wishes to reflect that in the vocabulary he uses. He doesn't say that "motherfucker" will translate literally to "liar" or "fraud". He says he'll use that word as a replacement precisely to make it clear that he's expressing an opinion and not making accusations.
And as a sidenote, the "motherfucker == incest" view some have expressed here is bizarre. a motherfucker is someone who fucks a mother, not necessarily his/her own mother. If you and your wife have a kid and you fuck her, then you are a motherfucker.
In fact, I fully intend to announce myself as a motherfucker just as soon as I finish fucking whoever comes to bear my child for the first time after said bearing has occurred.
This reminds me of the first episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! when Penn explains why they call people "motherfuckers" and "assholes" instead of liars, frauds, quacks, etc.
Quoted from Wikipedia:
Since their act is not normally associated with a frequent use of profanity, Jillette explains their choice of using the term bullshit in the opening episode: if they referred to people as frauds or liars, they could be sued for slander, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of chicanery, but as "vulgar abuse" is not legally considered slanderous, referring to them as assholes or motherfuckers ostensibly expresses an opinion rather than a statement of fact and is legally safer for them.
Yes, I believe that the relationship between a student and a private school is similar to the situation between an employee and his work place. But just like my boss doesn't care that I snort lines of coke from the artificially enhanced breasts of a luxury prostitute named Svetlana every Sunday morning while my wife is at church, the school principal doesn't have any business with what students do outside of school. If the teacher felt offended, he had the right to take action. The school, as an entity, has nothing to do with it.
Then, the question becomes: should the bible be interpreted literally or allegorically? If literally, then my process of deriving conclusions is correct, and my conclusions should be factually accurate, which they are not. If allegorically, then it's no better than Aesop's or La Fontaine's fables as an explanation for the world.
The key is that you can't arbitrarily decide "this part is true, that one is a metaphor" based on your own whims and opinions - yet, that's exactly what people do.
Legal age affects several rights, like the right to vote, to drink, or to drive (though at a different age, it's the same principle). But this has nothing to do with First Amendment rights. These belong to everyone. Even toddlers. Before you know how to speak, your speech is protected. Anything else is plain and simple bullshit.
I don't fancy anyone would deny a 17-year-old the right to speak at a rally, for example. How is this any different? Except, of course, for the fact that a school principal has no legal authority whatsoever over a student beyond what the contract with him or his parents (in the case of a minor) allows, and never in a situation where the student isn't under immediate care of the school. This whole thing is ridiculous.
... I'd undress and masturbate vigorously in front of my laptop the minute I heard of this, just to have grounds for suing. And then I'd wipe the hard drive and install Linux.
Am I the only person reminded of Orwell's Telescreens?
I paid for a legitimate copy of Spore. I also downloaded a pirate copy. I played the pirate copy because it didn't annoy me to the point of abusing my furniture.
So would I, and most legitimate buyers who are constantly frustrated by DRM. Especially the less computer-literate, to whom the DRM-free pirate version could me marketed as a simpler install and configuration process.
If you know nothing about computers, it's a lot easier to copy a cracked.exe to a program folder than to type a 32-character serial key and perform a fingerprint check and retina scan whenever you boot the game.
but services like Facebook where less privacy-sensitive people might actually reveal where they live as well as when they aren't there... that's worrysome. Then again, they'd just be reaping what they sow - not that it justifies the robber, of course.
Slashdot Mirror
...why is it called a "strange" quark anyways?
This is slightly off-topic, but from all the names they could have given the damn thing, why give it a bizarre name like that? As if particle physics weren't confusing already...
But as long as they are actively taking measures to enforce the use of a specific browser, why enforce the use of the worst modern browser out there? Ease of support may be used as an argument, but it certainly isn't a valid reason to push IE instead of, say, Google Chrome or Firefox. If you're going to push a standard, push a good one.
Of course, they have a deal with the vendor of the crap standard, so there you have it.
Christians who are slaves should give their masters full respect so that the name of God and his teaching will not be shamed. If your master is a Christian, that is no excuse for being disrespectful. You should work all the harder because you are helping another believer by your efforts. Teach these truths, Timothy, and encourage everyone to obey them. (1 Timothy 6:1-2 NLT)
Actually, since they kill people for their resources and make up damned lies to support that they're pretty much in line with the Old Testament.Not to mention the traditional Christian values of sexism, racism and homophobia that they promote so well.
Just because your personal definition of a word is less encompassing doesn't mean that Dubya wasn't a christian. It's a fair wager that every pope in history was a christian, but the Crusades and the Inquisition were their doings. Believing in the bible doesn't equate to being a good person.
Netbooks aren't very resistant to magic. If they party with a PC for tanking, then it'll be a different story.
How on Earth can those world-famous British tabloids survive in that environment?
Worst. Troll. Ever.
And it's in the name of Capitalism that Texans want to teach biblical creationism in public schools; and it's because of Capitalism that George Bush Senior said that atheists shouldn't be allowed to vote. Capitalism is also the reason USA money has "In God We Trust" printed on the bills instead of, say "In Money We Trust" at the door of every church and synagogue.
* Asserts patent infringement claims against non-copiers or against a large industry that is composed of non-copiers
This fits closely. Besides, why did they wait 10 years to file this suit? I'll tell you why: There is no patent infringement, but XEROX is looking for an easy settlement to fatten the piggy bank.
I recognize their historical importance in IT, but the past is past. Whoever is calling their shots now is acting like a patent troll. This isn't the first time, either.
I can: PATENT TROLL. Just because people don't use paper anymore...
Given the completely ignorant approach the Legislative and Judiciary powers in the United States of Jeebus have taken to the Internet, I am not surprised that the Executive power is also doing it wrong.
Not really. What his statement makes clear is that the show is presenting opinions, and not (alleged) facts, and that he wishes to reflect that in the vocabulary he uses. He doesn't say that "motherfucker" will translate literally to "liar" or "fraud". He says he'll use that word as a replacement precisely to make it clear that he's expressing an opinion and not making accusations.
And as a sidenote, the "motherfucker == incest" view some have expressed here is bizarre. a motherfucker is someone who fucks a mother, not necessarily his/her own mother. If you and your wife have a kid and you fuck her, then you are a motherfucker.
In fact, I fully intend to announce myself as a motherfucker just as soon as I finish fucking whoever comes to bear my child for the first time after said bearing has occurred.
This reminds me of the first episode of Penn & Teller: Bullshit! when Penn explains why they call people "motherfuckers" and "assholes" instead of liars, frauds, quacks, etc.
Quoted from Wikipedia:
Since their act is not normally associated with a frequent use of profanity, Jillette explains their choice of using the term bullshit in the opening episode: if they referred to people as frauds or liars, they could be sued for slander, even in the face of overwhelming evidence of chicanery, but as "vulgar abuse" is not legally considered slanderous, referring to them as assholes or motherfuckers ostensibly expresses an opinion rather than a statement of fact and is legally safer for them.
Yes, I believe that the relationship between a student and a private school is similar to the situation between an employee and his work place. But just like my boss doesn't care that I snort lines of coke from the artificially enhanced breasts of a luxury prostitute named Svetlana every Sunday morning while my wife is at church, the school principal doesn't have any business with what students do outside of school. If the teacher felt offended, he had the right to take action. The school, as an entity, has nothing to do with it.
Then, the question becomes: should the bible be interpreted literally or allegorically? If literally, then my process of deriving conclusions is correct, and my conclusions should be factually accurate, which they are not. If allegorically, then it's no better than Aesop's or La Fontaine's fables as an explanation for the world. The key is that you can't arbitrarily decide "this part is true, that one is a metaphor" based on your own whims and opinions - yet, that's exactly what people do.
Legal age affects several rights, like the right to vote, to drink, or to drive (though at a different age, it's the same principle).
But this has nothing to do with First Amendment rights. These belong to everyone. Even toddlers. Before you know how to speak, your speech is protected. Anything else is plain and simple bullshit.
I don't fancy anyone would deny a 17-year-old the right to speak at a rally, for example. How is this any different? Except, of course, for the fact that a school principal has no legal authority whatsoever over a student beyond what the contract with him or his parents (in the case of a minor) allows, and never in a situation where the student isn't under immediate care of the school. This whole thing is ridiculous.
... I'd undress and masturbate vigorously in front of my laptop the minute I heard of this, just to have grounds for suing. And then I'd wipe the hard drive and install Linux. Am I the only person reminded of Orwell's Telescreens?
The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation isn't Microsoft. It just belongs to Bill Gates.
4chan must be heating up the LOIC already.
I paid for a legitimate copy of Spore. I also downloaded a pirate copy. I played the pirate copy because it didn't annoy me to the point of abusing my furniture.
So would I, and most legitimate buyers who are constantly frustrated by DRM. Especially the less computer-literate, to whom the DRM-free pirate version could me marketed as a simpler install and configuration process. If you know nothing about computers, it's a lot easier to copy a cracked .exe to a program folder than to type a 32-character serial key and perform a fingerprint check and retina scan whenever you boot the game.
I agree in principle, but there are "beautifications" that make the UI more functional as well. The trick is moderation.
but services like Facebook where less privacy-sensitive people might actually reveal where they live as well as when they aren't there... that's worrysome. Then again, they'd just be reaping what they sow - not that it justifies the robber, of course.