One of my local stations has an on again, off again contract with the B&T show, and its complete shite. Listening to them is like watching full house: they break our into laughter every 2 seconds, regardless of wether or not a joke was told, much less if it were actually funny or not.
Plenty of people use it that way, therefore it's perfectly valid. That's how words and phrases work and become part of our language. Good thing the "irreguardless is not a word!" weren't in charge of language throughout human history, or else we'd still be grunting at eachother.
I started having the usual logic board problems with my 900 G3 iBook: flaky video, then no video. So I called up Apple and they Airborned me a box. I sent if off on a Tuesday, and get it back on Friday. I'm thinking, "hot damn, Apple is awesome, they have just made an evangelist out of me" as I open the package. Problem was, they sent me the wrong iBook. I live in North Dakota, and they sent me a school's laptop from Main. And it wasn't an upgrade, either; I had the maxed out 12" model, whereas they had the bare-bones configuration, except for the addition of an Airport card. I called Apple, and I called the school in Main (their number was engraved on the bottom), and I had mine back on Monday.
We aren't talking about fiddling with genes and bacteria, we're talking about THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO IT. We don't like Monsanto for their patents and their lawsuits against farmers or their "terminator" seeds, but if their labs were raided by and their employees arrested by counter-terrorist teams, we would object too.
Hypocracy is only when you're talking about the SAME ISSUE, moron. By (wrongly) rushing to call Slashdot a bunch of hypocrites, you are no better than what you are accusing them of being.
because the government (the police is the government) will be responsible for them.
Yes, the courts have found that the police have no responsibility to protect you, unfortunatly.
Your ideas about guns are purely theoretical and rely on a perfect world in order to work properly.
So are yours, only twice as naive. Gun nuts seem to have this idea that if you buy a gun, you turn into a motherfucking badass who can handle any burglar or mugger with no risk to yourself or others. I got news for you sparky: if cops have to worry about hitting the right target, or having their gun taken away and used against them, how is Joe Shmoe citizen going to fair? Especially considering how much more training the cop has than you do?
I'm not for gun control that prevents people from getting guns. I am for gun control that makes you get a license and some training on how to use the damn thing before you buy one. Now I can see why the NRA is worried about government regulation, but as their big non-political issue is gun saftey, and training and licensing would help fend off other regulation, I wish they'd quit being stubborn fools and drop their resistance to it. If a violent burglar breaks into your house, wouldn't you like to be able to shoot him before he shoots you? How about getting some training on how to respond to a robbery so don't accidently shoot your 8 year old son walking down a dark hallway because he heard a noise?
guns are here to stay, and THEY ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!!!
Of course their part of the problem. As are gun nuts who go home and watch Lethal Weapon or Dirty Harry and fondle themselves.
than one who served only to return to criticize his peers.
What, soldiers loose the freedom of speech and any right to criticize the armed forces? If a man in the army gets back from Iraq and criticizes the guards at Abu Ghraib, he's a bad person?
I would rather have someone who joined the reserves and did his time without incident
And got a sweet assignment ahead of hundereds of other people, and didn't show up for duty, and had his wings revoked after he failed to take a physical, thus throwing away a few hundered thousands dollars the military had spent training him...
than one who joined the military only to tell his fellow soldiers he had joined for political gain
Uh-huh. I'm sure he signed up with the intention of getting wounded three times and having shrapnel still in his body just so he could run for office (rolls eyes). And of course, anyone who joins the army looking to boost their following career, whether it be politics or for college money, is also obviously a bad person as well. I'd have to guess then that at least 90% of the armed forces must be made up of bad people in that case.
And I wont even go into how he threw "his" awards away...
Why not? You seem to have gone for enough other neocon revisionist history.
Yes, just like making marijuana illegal stopped it from showing up in the hands of criminals.
True, but any Shmoe can grow weed in his basement or in a tabacco field. Manufacturing guns takes a bit more work.
Basically, I'm not against the idea of owning guns, but I do belive that people should be licensed and trained to use them, and I don't understand why the NRA is against this. Especially since thier big non-political thing is gun saftey. If a cop, who has to go through a lot of training, has to worry about hitting the right target, and of having his gun taken away and used against him, how well is a civilian going to fair? If nothing else, it'll give you a better chance of hitting all those damn mexicans who are just waiting to rob your house. (/sarcasm).
The first 10 amendments limit the power of the government so as not to screw people over, this cell phone 'bill of rights' limits what cell carriers can do to screw people over. Not so different after all...
Unfortunately, a huge percentage of new cell phone users are in EXACTLY the situation that the OP mentions: they want the status symbol even though they can't really afford it.
Sure, thats the ONLY reason why people use cell phones. Wouldn't have anything to do with portability or convienience...just like how no one would have a practical reason for buying a laptop.
You are sad, bitter, and wrong. You are a lot better off having government than not having it. Bad government is a sign that something needs to be fixed, not that all government is bad.
There should be an addition to the lameness filter that automatically scores any post stating "Mod parent up!" as -10, dickweed, and gives the poster negative karma for the rest of the year. Now, that having been said...
Why do people moan and complain about a service but continue to pay the company?
Because we don't have any other choice. You want to use a cell phone, you have to agree to a draconian contract that gives the carrier all the power, because ALL the companies have the same horrid policies.
Try some other company. AT&T (my provider) of course has the standard reclamation fees that everyone else has
But it wouldn't matter if an album cost five bucks, downloading is cheaper
Of course it matters. Its not so much a matter of price or legality, but of convenience, as downloading stuff from the net is only free if your time is worthless. If the record industry makes it worth your while to hunt an album down because they charge way to much (i.e. the recent NERD cd for 16 bucks) then you'll do it. If you want it, don't want the hassle of searching through incomplete/mislabled/fake songs, then you'll buy it, if you have a guaranteed download for a resonable price.
Sure some people will download stuff from kazaa no matter how low the songs are priced at, but those people wouldn't start buying music if the entire Internet was nuked tomorrow morning.
Unfortunately, our ACLU friends look at the Bill of Rights in cafeteria fashion.
Of course they're going to pick and choose, don't be stupid. They have limited resources and can't stand up for every right in every state of the country, so they pick cases to support. And wtf would they spend a lot of time on gun issues when one of the larget and most powerful lobbies, the NRA, exists for only that purpose?
Furthermore, why is the ACLU a joke because it defends a lot of rights except for one, but the NRA is just fine even though it supports only one issue?
Just be glad that Slick Willy wasn't in office. He would have done jack squat about the Two Towers except make soothing noises.
Attacking the Taliban for sheltering Osama was a given. But if by "jack squat" you mean "invaded Iraq on false pretenses, thrown people in jail w/o due process, slashing taxes, massively increasing spending, followed by more slashing of taxes", then yes.
I think you'll find that in some (not all) cases that turns out to be against the law. Various congresscritters got tired of some Presidents not doling out all the pork they'd allocated.
I doubt that would stand up in court, as the job of enforcing the laws lies with the executive branch, but I suppose they could always try and impeach him for "not doing his job and enforcing the laws".
By that logic, however, the ban against "assault rifles" (or anything that looks like it might be one) is unconstitutional, since assault rifles clearly have a military use.
Being able to sue for millions of dollars is a *good* thing. 1) because they need to be smacked around for screwing people over and 2) they need to be hit hard enough that they don't do it again. So Europe wants to fine Microsoft $600 some million, whoop de frikkin do. Their business practices led them to their $40 billion pile of cash, so not only is that fine pocket change, they'll write it off as a business expense and keep doing the things that led to the fine in the first place.
Why is it that anti-regulation people see that having a economy where business's have all the rights of individuals + no regulations + no responsibility for their actions is A BAD THING?
Slashdot Mirror
One of my local stations has an on again, off again contract with the B&T show, and its complete shite. Listening to them is like watching full house: they break our into laughter every 2 seconds, regardless of wether or not a joke was told, much less if it were actually funny or not.
Plenty of people use it that way, therefore it's perfectly valid. That's how words and phrases work and become part of our language. Good thing the "irreguardless is not a word!" weren't in charge of language throughout human history, or else we'd still be grunting at eachother.
I started having the usual logic board problems with my 900 G3 iBook: flaky video, then no video. So I called up Apple and they Airborned me a box. I sent if off on a Tuesday, and get it back on Friday. I'm thinking, "hot damn, Apple is awesome, they have just made an evangelist out of me" as I open the package. Problem was, they sent me the wrong iBook. I live in North Dakota, and they sent me a school's laptop from Main. And it wasn't an upgrade, either; I had the maxed out 12" model, whereas they had the bare-bones configuration, except for the addition of an Airport card. I called Apple, and I called the school in Main (their number was engraved on the bottom), and I had mine back on Monday.
We aren't talking about fiddling with genes and bacteria, we're talking about THE GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO IT. We don't like Monsanto for their patents and their lawsuits against farmers or their "terminator" seeds, but if their labs were raided by and their employees arrested by counter-terrorist teams, we would object too.
Hypocracy is only when you're talking about the SAME ISSUE, moron. By (wrongly) rushing to call Slashdot a bunch of hypocrites, you are no better than what you are accusing them of being.
To answer your questions....
1) I've got 75 gigs, and my collection really isn't that big.
2) Don't forget the iPod is awsome as a portable hard drive.
Bush to Iraqi insurgents: please stop bringing it on.
If your talking about percentage of land area, pretty fucking rural. Most of the population lives in about half a dozen cities.
because the government (the police is the government) will be responsible for them.
Yes, the courts have found that the police have no responsibility to protect you, unfortunatly.
Your ideas about guns are purely theoretical and rely on a perfect world in order to work properly.
So are yours, only twice as naive. Gun nuts seem to have this idea that if you buy a gun, you turn into a motherfucking badass who can handle any burglar or mugger with no risk to yourself or others. I got news for you sparky: if cops have to worry about hitting the right target, or having their gun taken away and used against them, how is Joe Shmoe citizen going to fair? Especially considering how much more training the cop has than you do?
I'm not for gun control that prevents people from getting guns. I am for gun control that makes you get a license and some training on how to use the damn thing before you buy one. Now I can see why the NRA is worried about government regulation, but as their big non-political issue is gun saftey, and training and licensing would help fend off other regulation, I wish they'd quit being stubborn fools and drop their resistance to it. If a violent burglar breaks into your house, wouldn't you like to be able to shoot him before he shoots you? How about getting some training on how to respond to a robbery so don't accidently shoot your 8 year old son walking down a dark hallway because he heard a noise?
guns are here to stay, and THEY ARE NOT THE PROBLEM!!!
Of course their part of the problem. As are gun nuts who go home and watch Lethal Weapon or Dirty Harry and fondle themselves.
than one who served only to return to criticize his peers.
What, soldiers loose the freedom of speech and any right to criticize the armed forces? If a man in the army gets back from Iraq and criticizes the guards at Abu Ghraib, he's a bad person?
I would rather have someone who joined the reserves and did his time without incident
And got a sweet assignment ahead of hundereds of other people, and didn't show up for duty, and had his wings revoked after he failed to take a physical, thus throwing away a few hundered thousands dollars the military had spent training him...
than one who joined the military only to tell his fellow soldiers he had joined for political gain
Uh-huh. I'm sure he signed up with the intention of getting wounded three times and having shrapnel still in his body just so he could run for office (rolls eyes). And of course, anyone who joins the army looking to boost their following career, whether it be politics or for college money, is also obviously a bad person as well. I'd have to guess then that at least 90% of the armed forces must be made up of bad people in that case.
And I wont even go into how he threw "his" awards away...
Why not? You seem to have gone for enough other neocon revisionist history.
Yes, just like making marijuana illegal stopped it from showing up in the hands of criminals.
True, but any Shmoe can grow weed in his basement or in a tabacco field. Manufacturing guns takes a bit more work.
Basically, I'm not against the idea of owning guns, but I do belive that people should be licensed and trained to use them, and I don't understand why the NRA is against this. Especially since thier big non-political thing is gun saftey. If a cop, who has to go through a lot of training, has to worry about hitting the right target, and of having his gun taken away and used against him, how well is a civilian going to fair? If nothing else, it'll give you a better chance of hitting all those damn mexicans who are just waiting to rob your house. (/sarcasm).
The first 10 amendments limit the power of the government so as not to screw people over, this cell phone 'bill of rights' limits what cell carriers can do to screw people over. Not so different after all...
Unfortunately, a huge percentage of new cell phone users are in EXACTLY the situation that the OP mentions: they want the status symbol even though they can't really afford it.
Sure, thats the ONLY reason why people use cell phones. Wouldn't have anything to do with portability or convienience...just like how no one would have a practical reason for buying a laptop.
You are sad, bitter, and wrong. You are a lot better off having government than not having it. Bad government is a sign that something needs to be fixed, not that all government is bad.
There should be an addition to the lameness filter that automatically scores any post stating "Mod parent up!" as -10, dickweed, and gives the poster negative karma for the rest of the year. Now, that having been said...
Why do people moan and complain about a service but continue to pay the company?
Because we don't have any other choice. You want to use a cell phone, you have to agree to a draconian contract that gives the carrier all the power, because ALL the companies have the same horrid policies.
Try some other company. AT&T (my provider) of course has the standard reclamation fees that everyone else has
See what I mean.
Finding Nemo was done by Pixar. Shrek was done by Dreamworks. How stupid are you?
But it wouldn't matter if an album cost five bucks, downloading is cheaper
Of course it matters. Its not so much a matter of price or legality, but of convenience, as downloading stuff from the net is only free if your time is worthless. If the record industry makes it worth your while to hunt an album down because they charge way to much (i.e. the recent NERD cd for 16 bucks) then you'll do it. If you want it, don't want the hassle of searching through incomplete/mislabled/fake songs, then you'll buy it, if you have a guaranteed download for a resonable price.
Sure some people will download stuff from kazaa no matter how low the songs are priced at, but those people wouldn't start buying music if the entire Internet was nuked tomorrow morning.
Bush won the initial count
So he did.
Bush won the recount
Bush won the supreme court case
The SC case *stopped* the recount. Duh.
Bush won the press recount
Only with the counties that Gore wanted recounts in. A second, complete recount found that Gore would have won.
But don't let facts get in the way of your Bush bashing.
Oh he has plenty of facts to bash with, Mr. Pot.
Because we all know there's no such thing as viruses, worms, trojan horses, etc in the Linux world. Right?
Not compared to Windows, there aren't.
This is not a Windows-only issue.
But it's almost a Windows-only *problem*.
And if you think it is, you are as guilty of myopia as the PHBs you cite.
No, you're just rationalizing and exusing Microsofts negligence and incompetence.
Dennis is a member of the House, Russ is a member of the Senate.
Unfortunately, our ACLU friends look at the Bill of Rights in cafeteria fashion.
Of course they're going to pick and choose, don't be stupid. They have limited resources and can't stand up for every right in every state of the country, so they pick cases to support. And wtf would they spend a lot of time on gun issues when one of the larget and most powerful lobbies, the NRA, exists for only that purpose?
Furthermore, why is the ACLU a joke because it defends a lot of rights except for one, but the NRA is just fine even though it supports only one issue?
All those "detaines" are still innocent until proven guilty, so I don't see how indefinete detention without a lawyer or outside contact is "humane".
Just be glad that Slick Willy wasn't in office. He would have done jack squat about the Two Towers except make soothing noises.
Attacking the Taliban for sheltering Osama was a given. But if by "jack squat" you mean "invaded Iraq on false pretenses, thrown people in jail w/o due process, slashing taxes, massively increasing spending, followed by more slashing of taxes", then yes.
So you admit your original claim was bullshit.
It wasn't his claim, dumbass. Different poster.
I think you'll find that in some (not all) cases that turns out to be against the law. Various congresscritters got tired of some Presidents not doling out all the pork they'd allocated.
I doubt that would stand up in court, as the job of enforcing the laws lies with the executive branch, but I suppose they could always try and impeach him for "not doing his job and enforcing the laws".
By that logic, however, the ban against "assault rifles" (or anything that looks like it might be one) is unconstitutional, since assault rifles clearly have a military use.
Did you miss the part about state militias?
Being able to sue for millions of dollars is a *good* thing. 1) because they need to be smacked around for screwing people over and 2) they need to be hit hard enough that they don't do it again. So Europe wants to fine Microsoft $600 some million, whoop de frikkin do. Their business practices led them to their $40 billion pile of cash, so not only is that fine pocket change, they'll write it off as a business expense and keep doing the things that led to the fine in the first place.
Why is it that anti-regulation people see that having a economy where business's have all the rights of individuals + no regulations + no responsibility for their actions is A BAD THING?