Very well. Then you would only have the right to bear arms if you are subject to a certain amount of training, or "regulation". And organized into a militia.
Both of which the NRA and other nuts are against, and not without reason.
I am personally in favor of a training/safety requirement to own firearms, but I can also envision how it would be abused: the training would be hard enough/unavailable, and so become a de facto ban against ownership.
But regardless, even with your vocabulary, there is more restriction in the Amendment than gun PACs are willing to concede.
And finally, this picking nits over language is silly. We should frankly have a new amendment constructed to embody current mores, instead of try to parse the language from the old one. The Constitution is a living document, and we should treat it as such, instead of try to reanimate a corpse. Determining, what, exactly, the most popular, current, consensus is on what levels of freedom should be allowed would be more productive than trying to deconstruct the meaning of the original.
Complaining on the ground of privacy when google scans open SSIDs, is like complaining for copyright infringement when google indexes publicly available web pages.
Or takes your picture from the street, and then puts it onto StreetView.
Google has only captured publicly available information, and images. They just were smart enough to collect it, aggregate it, and use it in a valuable way. The outrage should not be over the collection of the data, but a realization that it's out there at all. Google has been doing us a favor, really, by demonstrating that that stuff is available. If Google stopped, the data would still be just as much out there, and less scrupulous persons than Google would still know how to collect it and get to it.
You seriously think that's an abusive email? The closest he came to profanity was "crappy". He displays some frustration tbs. But I don't see anything in that letter, were it sent to me, that would cause me to reach for my lawyer for protection.
This drive still suffers from the historical bugaboo of spinning platters: it is damaged by shock. Also, it has the power draw (and heat output) of other spinning media.
Those are the two biggest reasons for SSD, especially in notebooks. Performance improvements are a factor, but I think they're the least interesting. In this respect, Seagate still needs to bring an answer, and they need to do it fast to justify their run up in stock price.
They delegate that. Delegation is what managers do. It's even more true than that. The bigger companies script the first pass as resume screening, and only those resumes with high buzzword scores as returned by the script get read by a human. As a smart programmer, you should understand the implications of that: your resume should return a high score if you grep it for industry buzzwords. Buzzwords phrased incorrectly that won't match the regexp won't get picked up. And you don't know how smart the script pattern matching is; it may be case sensitive. It may require things to be phrased precisely according to expectation, like "DBA" is matched but "database administrator" is not.
So the OP is right: pack your res with as many buzzword compliant phrases as you can that you have any legitimacy of backing up if asked. Phrase them such to be legit hits from the most elementary of resume scrapers.
You can be sure that it was no accident that "they" "caught" the guys rummaging the trash. The confirmation is the followup, that included warrants to search the premises of them rummagers to find the microscopes.
Here's a couple of other things I would infer: -you will never hear from the rummagers again. -the NSA shredded some bogus intelligence and let the rummagers piece it together before busting them. There's nothing so good as catching someone being clever; their cleverness and effort deludes them into thinking that what they have is genuine.
It goes 20 miles in 24 hours--or ~1mph? You could outrun it--and the squad that it's supporting, as they'll be tied to it or it'll get lost.
Longer journeys might make it useful, but so much of it's own carrying capacity would be taken up by it's own fuel demands that it still wouldn't be able to go very far. Plus, it'll be big target--take one of these out, and the squad has to leave behind 400 pounds of gear, if it isn't destroyed already. If it can barely walk, it's not going to be able to take much damage before it's motor control is confused, let alone act correctly to avoid direct fire.
I suppose the best use would be for non-hostile but rugged terrain that's 10 miles from a FOB--so it can take supplies out 10 miles and then 10 miles back to refuel. But isn't that what helicopters are for?
I honestly don't see the use for this with those limitations. If the fuel is preplaced, or if the speed is increased, I suppose. But I don't think either is likely to happen.
I would say that you could the cut the US military budget in half
Really, Mr. Conservative? Which of the two wars are you willing to cancel to fund strategic space dominance? 'Cause that's one hell of a deal that you're offering.
Tell you what: why don't we eliminate the entire military budget, and fund space domination AND education! I'm not serious, of course. I don't believe in peace; China, for one, would eat our lunch. But I don't think you're serious either. Your neocon president already made his choice, and it was for more military and less of everything else, including space, education, and increased dependance on credit from China. I hope it's worth it.
including four racks each capable of holding 48 servers for its main systems. The main infrastructure at Albany Senior High only requires four servers, suggesting an almost 50-fold saving on hardware requirements.
That is a frankly hilarious leap of inference. If you have a 4 door car, that means that you always travel with 5 adults, right? I mean, c'mon. It's statements like that that make OSS guys seem like wild-eyed loony tunes. Instead of making ridiculous, bold statements, why don't you, y'know, do some homework? How many servers do they really use, regardless of how many racks they have? It might be 4-8 big ones. That would be an interesting statement of fact, and would demonstrate the value of OSS. Instead, you just seem lazy and not able to objectively gather data.
It doesn't appear that they know much about stock trades. Or other personally earned income.
While I agree with you on income that's reported by somebody else, like salary income when you Work For the Man, it appears that the feds don't know a lot about transaction income.
It's worth pointing out specifically that our debt wih China is one of the largest weapons in our peace arsenal. If China takes a warlike action (ie invades Taiwan) one of the first things we would do is cancel our debt obligations.
It is at least partially due to this fear that China has not yet declared open hostilities. When they start selling that debt, or stop taking on new debt, watch out.
I do not think that the current issue with Google rises to the level that we could do that and preserve our credibility. But it does start painting a picture, and combined with the jailing of those steel execs last summer its not going in a positive direction.
I'd love to know the other 20 companies that were hacked at the same time as Google. We'd have a clearer knowledge of China's intentions and the threat she poses. But you can believe that the State Department knows.
When does China come up for the MFN vote again? Expect to hear this then again, and maybe more details too.
90% of the planets have an environment remarkably like Vancouver, WA, and a sum total of 500 human inhabitants makes sense to you? At least it's consistent, I guess. But if you're saying FireFly's mythos is sub-standard to SG1, I think you have to do a lot better than that.
And btw: it is not really ever very clear that all of FF's planets orbit the same star. I think Joss left it purposely vague, 'cause he didn't want FTL but wanted more room to explore than a single solar system would allow. I have much less gripe with that than every environment in FF resembling So Cal a little too much.
Every single time, without any of them hesitating at all, the answer comes back "The Queen".
I suspect that's because she hardly makes any public decisions at all. It's easy to believe that her silence belies competence and wisdom, but she just as easily might be a nincompoop, and worthless in the clutch. What are her stances on any of the controversial issues in the UK? Without knowing her opinion, it's easy to believe that she agrees with you. However, if forced to reveal her stances, you might find that she doesn't agree with you nearly as much as you'd like.
I know. It's like claiming that the BBC show "world have your say" is somehow a British show, when it clearly represents the interests of the (English speaking) world. Crazy. Americans!
No, you're not correct. Being able to look up useless information isn't helpful. That's mostly useless. You could very well have waited until you got access to a public library and had the same effect.
It's being able to have instant access to information that you can then use to further your goals that you will be empowered to affect change. And I think we've been there for a little while, eg stock research. It used to take subscribing to paper information, and the speed of your reactions were dictated by the medium of information. Now you can take advantage of new information instantly to profitable effect.
Well, 272 pages? With pictures? That seems like a lot of work for a "fun little hoax", although with a profit motive I suppose there's a lot of people that will spend a lot of time creating something that they can foist on the gullible. With one rich patron who is known to be interested in curiosities, and to pay well for them, I suppose someone might spend the time and energy to create this lengthy of a hoax. Even to construct an artificial language behind it.
I personally have done a lot of glossolalia, especially when I was younger, and that seems the most probable to me. I even used "invented script" which the wikipedia article claims to be rare. I have no idea what an analysis of it would show in terms of patterns and grammar, but frankly it probably would be seen to follow the patterns of English, by-and-large. Still 250+ pages of that including pictures would take a lot of dedication. Perhaps if I made a point of it, including subjecting myself to some kind of period-appropriate hallucinogenic, either accidental exposure or on purpose "to channel the energies".
The use of repeated words--sometimes three in a row!--would seem to exclude any European author that was either speaking in their native language or an invented one. I can't imagine that grammar pattern to seem natural, even if generating an invented language attempting at naturalness, to a European language speaker. I can't think of a single instance where I have used triple words, and only very rarely use doubles (eg "that that" or "had had"). I don't think I did when I was performing glossolalia even, I was following my, and my instinct for the language conformed to what I found natural patterns, which is English natch. Perhaps if writing trailing sentences, like verbal ellipses? "I wanted to slay the dragon, if if if only I could find the sword." It's interesting that that (!) construction is more common in Asiatic languages, which leads me to think that it was perhaps a European taking dictation from an Asian language speaker. A European author would explain the lack of Asian symbolism in the drawings, but might still account for their unusualness if they were drawing by description. One would think, though, that they would have more errors then too; the text as well. Perhaps the rough draft had the corrections and errors, and this is a copy from that.
think that many of the "disaster scenarios" are over hyped
More to the point, unless the OP is a climatologist himself, he has arrived at that conclusion with no more evidence than what's available in the popular media. Wanting it to be that way is not the same as what is actually going to happen.
That's exactly the problem with Murdoch's tactic. With the deal between Murdoch and Microsoft, Google would be losing access to only the unique stories generated by News Corp. That uniqueness is less now than it has ever been, and is of dubious value to boot.
Murdoch thinks that his brands have value unto themselves. Of course, they don't. People just want the content, and all things being equal they'll get it from the cheapest provider of that. Right now the cheapest provider is the AP, and unfortunately for Murdoch his stories are largely and mostly equal to what people get from the AP.
Murdoch, and really all of the other news services, have another solution--provide interesting, relevant, and unique news content that people are willing to pay for. Too bad for them, that's hard and expensive to do. Their other option--to reprint AP stories--means that are no more valuable than acting as an AP redistributor. That used to have value in the past, when the source of news was the printed page. However, now there is no longer any value to that, since the AP will give that content to Google and Google will redistribute it for free.
I ANAL, but:
One thing is pretty clear, they must unionize/unify and act as a single entity in either leaving or negotiating. And I don't really see that happening.
I'm pretty sure that would amount to illegal market collusion among competitors. They might be able to signal their intent to each other through the marketplace (like what Murdoch appears to be trying to do) but an actual binding requirement on each for behavior would be a no no.
What the market is clearly asking for is one national news service, with perhaps regional stories provided by local news sources. Newspapers are in trouble because they each reprint each others national stories, and there's no need for that replicated distribution in the age of the internet.
It's this back and forth that makes me wonder if we'll ever get or stay married.
Do yourself a favor and don't. If you don't respect her now, and she doesn't respect you, that will never change. You'll spend the rest of your life trying to prove yourself to her, and feeling worthless all the while.
Slashdot Mirror
Or, read a book. Less expensive and ad- free.
Why TV Corp believes that it's the consumers' responsibility to provide them with a business model is beyond me.
Very well. Then you would only have the right to bear arms if you are subject to a certain amount of training, or "regulation". And organized into a militia.
Both of which the NRA and other nuts are against, and not without reason.
I am personally in favor of a training/safety requirement to own firearms, but I can also envision how it would be abused: the training would be hard enough/unavailable, and so become a de facto ban against ownership.
But regardless, even with your vocabulary, there is more restriction in the Amendment than gun PACs are willing to concede.
And finally, this picking nits over language is silly. We should frankly have a new amendment constructed to embody current mores, instead of try to parse the language from the old one. The Constitution is a living document, and we should treat it as such, instead of try to reanimate a corpse. Determining, what, exactly, the most popular, current, consensus is on what levels of freedom should be allowed would be more productive than trying to deconstruct the meaning of the original.
What part of "well regulated" do you not understand?
Complaining on the ground of privacy when google scans open SSIDs, is like complaining for copyright infringement when google indexes publicly available web pages.
Or takes your picture from the street, and then puts it onto StreetView.
Google has only captured publicly available information, and images. They just were smart enough to collect it, aggregate it, and use it in a valuable way. The outrage should not be over the collection of the data, but a realization that it's out there at all. Google has been doing us a favor, really, by demonstrating that that stuff is available. If Google stopped, the data would still be just as much out there, and less scrupulous persons than Google would still know how to collect it and get to it.
You seriously think that's an abusive email? The closest he came to profanity was "crappy". He displays some frustration tbs. But I don't see anything in that letter, were it sent to me, that would cause me to reach for my lawyer for protection.
This drive still suffers from the historical bugaboo of spinning platters: it is damaged by shock. Also, it has the power draw (and heat output) of other spinning media.
Those are the two biggest reasons for SSD, especially in notebooks. Performance improvements are a factor, but I think they're the least interesting. In this respect, Seagate still needs to bring an answer, and they need to do it fast to justify their run up in stock price.
Wow, that would save a lot of time. Risk: speed edition!
They delegate that. Delegation is what managers do.
It's even more true than that. The bigger companies script the first pass as resume screening, and only those resumes with high buzzword scores as returned by the script get read by a human. As a smart programmer, you should understand the implications of that: your resume should return a high score if you grep it for industry buzzwords. Buzzwords phrased incorrectly that won't match the regexp won't get picked up. And you don't know how smart the script pattern matching is; it may be case sensitive. It may require things to be phrased precisely according to expectation, like "DBA" is matched but "database administrator" is not.
So the OP is right: pack your res with as many buzzword compliant phrases as you can that you have any legitimacy of backing up if asked. Phrase them such to be legit hits from the most elementary of resume scrapers.
You can be sure that it was no accident that "they" "caught" the guys rummaging the trash. The confirmation is the followup, that included warrants to search the premises of them rummagers to find the microscopes.
Here's a couple of other things I would infer:
-you will never hear from the rummagers again.
-the NSA shredded some bogus intelligence and let the rummagers piece it together before busting them. There's nothing so good as catching someone being clever; their cleverness and effort deludes them into thinking that what they have is genuine.
This has to be refueled every day?
It goes 20 miles in 24 hours--or ~1mph? You could outrun it--and the squad that it's supporting, as they'll be tied to it or it'll get lost.
Longer journeys might make it useful, but so much of it's own carrying capacity would be taken up by it's own fuel demands that it still wouldn't be able to go very far. Plus, it'll be big target--take one of these out, and the squad has to leave behind 400 pounds of gear, if it isn't destroyed already. If it can barely walk, it's not going to be able to take much damage before it's motor control is confused, let alone act correctly to avoid direct fire.
I suppose the best use would be for non-hostile but rugged terrain that's 10 miles from a FOB--so it can take supplies out 10 miles and then 10 miles back to refuel. But isn't that what helicopters are for?
I honestly don't see the use for this with those limitations. If the fuel is preplaced, or if the speed is increased, I suppose. But I don't think either is likely to happen.
I would say that you could the cut the US military budget in half
Really, Mr. Conservative? Which of the two wars are you willing to cancel to fund strategic space dominance? 'Cause that's one hell of a deal that you're offering.
Tell you what: why don't we eliminate the entire military budget, and fund space domination AND education! I'm not serious, of course. I don't believe in peace; China, for one, would eat our lunch. But I don't think you're serious either. Your neocon president already made his choice, and it was for more military and less of everything else, including space, education, and increased dependance on credit from China. I hope it's worth it.
including four racks each capable of holding 48 servers for its main systems. The main infrastructure at Albany Senior High only requires four servers, suggesting an almost 50-fold saving on hardware requirements.
That is a frankly hilarious leap of inference. If you have a 4 door car, that means that you always travel with 5 adults, right? I mean, c'mon. It's statements like that that make OSS guys seem like wild-eyed loony tunes. Instead of making ridiculous, bold statements, why don't you, y'know, do some homework? How many servers do they really use, regardless of how many racks they have? It might be 4-8 big ones. That would be an interesting statement of fact, and would demonstrate the value of OSS. Instead, you just seem lazy and not able to objectively gather data.
It doesn't appear that they know much about stock trades. Or other personally earned income.
While I agree with you on income that's reported by somebody else, like salary income when you Work For the Man, it appears that the feds don't know a lot about transaction income.
I think you answered your own question.
It's worth pointing out specifically that our debt wih China is one of the largest weapons in our peace arsenal. If China takes a warlike action (ie invades Taiwan) one of the first things we would do is cancel our debt obligations.
It is at least partially due to this fear that China has not yet declared open hostilities. When they start selling that debt, or stop taking on new debt, watch out.
I do not think that the current issue with Google rises to the level that we could do that and preserve our credibility. But it does start painting a picture, and combined with the jailing of those steel execs last summer its not going in a positive direction.
I'd love to know the other 20 companies that were hacked at the same time as Google. We'd have a clearer knowledge of China's intentions and the threat she poses. But you can believe that the State Department knows.
When does China come up for the MFN vote again? Expect to hear this then again, and maybe more details too.
90% of the planets have an environment remarkably like Vancouver, WA, and a sum total of 500 human inhabitants makes sense to you? At least it's consistent, I guess. But if you're saying FireFly's mythos is sub-standard to SG1, I think you have to do a lot better than that.
And btw: it is not really ever very clear that all of FF's planets orbit the same star. I think Joss left it purposely vague, 'cause he didn't want FTL but wanted more room to explore than a single solar system would allow. I have much less gripe with that than every environment in FF resembling So Cal a little too much.
Every single time, without any of them hesitating at all, the answer comes back "The Queen".
I suspect that's because she hardly makes any public decisions at all. It's easy to believe that her silence belies competence and wisdom, but she just as easily might be a nincompoop, and worthless in the clutch. What are her stances on any of the controversial issues in the UK? Without knowing her opinion, it's easy to believe that she agrees with you. However, if forced to reveal her stances, you might find that she doesn't agree with you nearly as much as you'd like.
I know. It's like claiming that the BBC show "world have your say" is somehow a British show, when it clearly represents the interests of the (English speaking) world. Crazy. Americans!
No, you're not correct. Being able to look up useless information isn't helpful. That's mostly useless. You could very well have waited until you got access to a public library and had the same effect.
It's being able to have instant access to information that you can then use to further your goals that you will be empowered to affect change. And I think we've been there for a little while, eg stock research. It used to take subscribing to paper information, and the speed of your reactions were dictated by the medium of information. Now you can take advantage of new information instantly to profitable effect.
Well, 272 pages? With pictures? That seems like a lot of work for a "fun little hoax", although with a profit motive I suppose there's a lot of people that will spend a lot of time creating something that they can foist on the gullible. With one rich patron who is known to be interested in curiosities, and to pay well for them, I suppose someone might spend the time and energy to create this lengthy of a hoax. Even to construct an artificial language behind it.
I personally have done a lot of glossolalia, especially when I was younger, and that seems the most probable to me. I even used "invented script" which the wikipedia article claims to be rare. I have no idea what an analysis of it would show in terms of patterns and grammar, but frankly it probably would be seen to follow the patterns of English, by-and-large. Still 250+ pages of that including pictures would take a lot of dedication. Perhaps if I made a point of it, including subjecting myself to some kind of period-appropriate hallucinogenic, either accidental exposure or on purpose "to channel the energies".
The use of repeated words--sometimes three in a row!--would seem to exclude any European author that was either speaking in their native language or an invented one. I can't imagine that grammar pattern to seem natural, even if generating an invented language attempting at naturalness, to a European language speaker. I can't think of a single instance where I have used triple words, and only very rarely use doubles (eg "that that" or "had had"). I don't think I did when I was performing glossolalia even, I was following my, and my instinct for the language conformed to what I found natural patterns, which is English natch. Perhaps if writing trailing sentences, like verbal ellipses? "I wanted to slay the dragon, if if if only I could find the sword." It's interesting that that (!) construction is more common in Asiatic languages, which leads me to think that it was perhaps a European taking dictation from an Asian language speaker. A European author would explain the lack of Asian symbolism in the drawings, but might still account for their unusualness if they were drawing by description. One would think, though, that they would have more errors then too; the text as well. Perhaps the rough draft had the corrections and errors, and this is a copy from that.
think that many of the "disaster scenarios" are over hyped
More to the point, unless the OP is a climatologist himself, he has arrived at that conclusion with no more evidence than what's available in the popular media. Wanting it to be that way is not the same as what is actually going to happen.
That's exactly the problem with Murdoch's tactic. With the deal between Murdoch and Microsoft, Google would be losing access to only the unique stories generated by News Corp. That uniqueness is less now than it has ever been, and is of dubious value to boot.
Murdoch thinks that his brands have value unto themselves. Of course, they don't. People just want the content, and all things being equal they'll get it from the cheapest provider of that. Right now the cheapest provider is the AP, and unfortunately for Murdoch his stories are largely and mostly equal to what people get from the AP.
Murdoch, and really all of the other news services, have another solution--provide interesting, relevant, and unique news content that people are willing to pay for. Too bad for them, that's hard and expensive to do. Their other option--to reprint AP stories--means that are no more valuable than acting as an AP redistributor. That used to have value in the past, when the source of news was the printed page. However, now there is no longer any value to that, since the AP will give that content to Google and Google will redistribute it for free.
I ANAL, but:
One thing is pretty clear, they must unionize/unify and act as a single entity in either leaving or negotiating. And I don't really see that happening.
I'm pretty sure that would amount to illegal market collusion among competitors. They might be able to signal their intent to each other through the marketplace (like what Murdoch appears to be trying to do) but an actual binding requirement on each for behavior would be a no no.
What the market is clearly asking for is one national news service, with perhaps regional stories provided by local news sources. Newspapers are in trouble because they each reprint each others national stories, and there's no need for that replicated distribution in the age of the internet.
I wonder how they verify that you have the requisite $2M in assets. And what they can do with the information you provided to assert that.
It's this back and forth that makes me wonder if we'll ever get or stay married.
Do yourself a favor and don't. If you don't respect her now, and she doesn't respect you, that will never change. You'll spend the rest of your life trying to prove yourself to her, and feeling worthless all the while.