Would the follow-up be Noninvasive Oral Compound Obstructing Wall-Blocking Organisms, Yahoo?
(It's really hard to come up with relevant medical terms that start with "Y.")
Since Congress, now a wholly owned subsidiary of the telecoms, wants to give them a direct connection between their hands and our pockets, and since the FCC and Congress cannot seem to agree on who should control what, I propose that the correct answer is that you and I should control the Internet.
We need to figure out a way to build very inexpensive weatherproof low-power WiMAX routers that we can install rapidly--pretty much everywhere. We need to seed them in so many places that nobody can take them all down.
The airwaves are the property of everyone, not just a select few. It's time we proved that.
Well, if you're gonna rock out with a metaphor, I always like the Kevin & Kell approach: referring to Windows as a "scratching post" for malware.
Posted from my Windows 7 desktop---oh noes!!!
The original definition of Plug and Play as a marketing term was the concept that if a user plugs in a hardware peripheral, like a printer, scanner, microphone, etc., it should tell Windows what it is and Windows should automatically make it work. As far as I know, there were never any documents identifying Plug and Play with, say, software, much less malware code.
Then don't use them to license your products. They're pretty useful to others, though.
Or did they hurt you in some way? Show me on the body of your work where the bad licenses touched you...
If I don't write software in the first place, then how is it my problem if Windows isn't well-written? If I buy a car, it's because I myself can't build one. If I buy an operating system, it's because I myself can't write one.
Speaking frankly here, it's pretty fatuous to assume that everyone who can use a tool reasonably well has to be able to make that same tool. How many people buy screwdrivers if they can make their own?
Governments have a responsibility to do that to protect the rights of their constituents. Governments do not inherently and SHOULD NOT have rights. Ever.
VideoLAN wrote their own damn code. By your logic, then, AOL (oh, excuse me, "Aol") have no complaint coming.
--
Remember, you can't spell "asshole" without AOL
Personally, I seriously doubt that the individual shareholders had too much to do with the gundecking of the safety protocols that led to this debacle. Solution: we find those responsible, which most likely will include the current occupants of the head offices at BP, Transocean, and Halliburton, put them out in the Gulf and let them come back when they've properly cleaned up their mess--not before.
I've got a solution: Upon conviction, sentence ALL of BP, Transocean, and Halliburton upper management to clean up the Gulf. Duration: Until it's at least as clean as it was before April 20. Take whatever BP owed them under their contracts before their convictions, PLUS all their current assets and split it up among the cleanup crews who aren't there on a chain gang. They get basic food, shelter, and medical care--and neon pink, orange and yellow HAZMAT suits so they're harder to lose track of. It's for their protection, after all; we wouldn't want them to get lost. After they're done cleaning up the Gulf, they're free to save up to buy property along the Gulf Coast.
Owing more on your house than it's worth has a negative impact on your credit rating, whether you're current on your payments or not. So any employer who does what you say ("checks credit ratings") will view you negatively.
Unless I'm not looking for work because I like my current job and don't have any respect for your opinion.
Rental prices are down compared to last year. Also, it's been 2 years now that landlords have taken tenants who have gone through the foreclosure route. You've been living in la-la land if you haven't noticed it. Landlords are settling for a lot less than they used to.
Yes, insulting me further is just about guaranteed to win me over to whatever it is you're saying. Did you miss the part about me not wanting to change houses OR jobs?
As for the rest, it's all been in the news for the last year. Just look for it. Or don't you know how to search?
I never had the need to search. The burden of proof was on you. Yes, your facts are lined up so that if I wanted to do something I don't want to do, I could do it with somewhat less of a negative impact than I thought. Of course, if I moved, I could keep my job and still change over, but I still don't want to move, because I like my house, underwater as I currently am on the mortgage. So yes, I know how to search. Do you know how not to be obnoxious? Please prove it.
Again, I don't want to move or change jobs just so I can risk my ass on Hillsborough County streets. In fact, because you've been so irritating about insisting that I change my lifestyle to suit you and ride a bike everywhere I go, I'm not saving up for a %^&* black Cadillac Escalade with 22" spinners, extra chrome, Truck Nutz® and your $%^&* email address printed in 400-point type across the back.
And a matching one for my wife in gold.
My lifestyle may be carbon-neutral even without the twin GMT-820s, but at least I'm not an Internet Environmentalist(TM) who goes around imposing his lifestyle on others. I'm not here belittling you because you can't drive. I'm here belittling you because you're too thick to understand that a)Hillsborough County roads are not safe for cyclists; b)I'm not ready to change residences; c)I'm not ready to change jobs; and d)when someone gets obnoxious about wanting me to do something, no matter HOW good it would be for me and the universe, I have a tendency to do the exact opposite. So how about you get on your kitted-out touring bike or whatever and pedal down to your natural food store and buy a nice tall glass of completely organic, animal-suffering-free, carbon-neutral STFU?
1. I. don't. want. a. different. house. I don't want the financial and legal entanglements that come with walking away from a mortgage.
So forget about changing jobs for the next 10 years, because that's how long it will take for housing prices to recover.
If I continue to make payments on the house, it won't have any negative effect on my job prospects. You're now arguing against yourself.
People owning rental properties have found they can't afford to be as fussy as they used to be, because if they are, then THEY will end up with vacant units that end up being repossessed. The market has changed - and we're only about half-way through the house repossessions - if that.
And I'm sure they can be convinced of that...eventually, but probably not by someone walking into their office looking for an apartment because they've just walked away from a mortgage. It would be about like the proprietor of a fruit stand selling fruit to someone on a net-30 invoice on the strength of that buyer's previous orders, which include a huge pile of unpaid papayas left rotting on the side of a road.
Millions are doing it and reporting less stress, more money for essentials like food and clothing, increased job mobility, and they're able to clear off their other debts while living basically rent-free. They will be the future consumers, not someone who owes twice what their current house is worth.
Show me these millions. Name me a few hundred thousand and show me sworn affadavits. And as for the "They will be the future consumers, not someone who owes twice what their current house is worth,"...prove that too. I'll wait. Until then, it's just rhetoric from someone who wants me to rebuild my entire life around a bicycle.
Employers aren't going to look at someone who's qualified and say "don't hire them - they walked away from an under-water mortgage".
You haven't tried to get a job in finance or with the government, have you? Money problems are a HUGE red flag to US employers, especially in industries where financial responsibility is part of the organization's reputation. So, basically, you're wrong.
You need to learn some reading comprehension. I never said you didn't shower. Here's, word-for-word, what I wrote - "You need to shower anyways - and since you'll be healthier, you'll use fewer medical resources down the road." The "healthier" was obviously in reference to riding a bike on a daily basis. Duh. The benefits aren't just saving energy.
You're the one who should be ashamed, for lying so brazenly, not me.
Bite me. I haven't lied one bit. I misinterpreted your little comment as an insult, which given the fact that I'm increasingly of the opinion that you're a pissant troll, would be easy to do. "You need to shower anyway" can be interpreted two ways, and if you can't see the other one, well, that's consistent with your "my way or the highway" narrative so far.
Screw you. It's people like you that annoy people like me into going out and getting BIGGER cars.
You either aren't getting it, or you're among the most sophisticated trolls in Slashdot history.
1. I. don't. want. a. different. house. I don't want the financial and legal entanglements that come with walking away from a mortgage. And where am I supposed to live during those two years while qualifying for a new house? An apartment? Who's going to rent to someone who welshes on a mortgage? You? I hope so, because every other landlord checks credit, and I don't see them handing out rental agreements to people who dump their mortgages.
2. Millions of people like American Idol too, but that doesn't make it a great idea. As Chris Rock says about single parenthood: "Yes, you can do it, but that don't mean it's to be done."
3. Even if your logic weren't one great big huge nonsequitur, what are all the people who walk away supposed to do for housing and jobs? Employers aren't suddenly going to look at walk-away people and say, "Oh, these people are doing something good for the economy! Let me ignore my HR department and hire them right away!"
4. I shower plenty now, thank you. That was a stupid and mean personal attack from you, and you should be ashamed.
Seriously, if you want me to give up my car, you've got to stop coming up with bad ideas and terrible excuses, and start rebuilding the entire infrastructure of this country so that cars simply aren't necessary. I'll help, but I'm not just going to dump my current life and obligations because some would-be Internet Thoreau says I should.
Yes, technically 7 to 10 years of reduced credit availability and much higher interest rates still qualifies as "temporary," but it still does not make the prospect of biking to work very attractive. Again, to sum up here, you're basically suggesting that, for the privilege of biking to work, I either: a) change jobs in a down economy; or b) take a massive credit hit by walking away from my mortgage to move closer to work. For that privilege, I can look forward to inattentive or even hostile motorists putting my life in danger; the need to shower--and use extra water, thus meaning I'm still using lots and lots of resources (and I just know you'll insist I only use the absolute lowest flow shower, thus guaranteeing I'll still carry street funk afterward); the need to change clothes, increasing my laundry loads every week (using both more power and water!); and no protection from rain.
The funny thing is, I LIKE bicycling, but it's just not feasible for me to use for commuting, for all the reasons stated above and more. I'd rather save money and simply have my car retrofitted with the latest efficient-energy technology when it becomes readily available.
1. It often specifies serious penalties when you do that too, and doesn't mention what it does to your credit rating (hint: usually around -200 points); 2. I'm happy for you. Good on ya. Seriously. That doesn't make your advice any good for me.
It's a nice idea in theory, but in theory, Gozilla's just another lizard.;)
Seriously, changing jobs in the current U.S. economy and changing houses when one is upside down on the mortgage are nontrivial. Believe me, I wish I were that adaptable, but no.
As far as the shopping cart idea, that sounds like a great way of radically increasing stopping distance and turning radius--and of slinging canned items all over the road when one hits a decent bump or pothole.
There's also the fact that even though there are now signs up in parts of the city reminding people that Florida Statutes 316 and 317 contain a section that requires auto drivers to give cyclists a three-foot berth, the combination of drivers using cell phones, drivers just plain oblivious to their surroundings, and drivers who seem to actively hate cyclists make bicycling a nonstarter in most of eastern Hillsborough County. And no, bike routes are not available in most of the area--the same oblivious drivers who run over cyclists also don't want to pay the additional taxes. I'm not defending the system, mind you; just advising you what I'm up against when I complain of the difficulty of implementing your ideas in my area. Seriously, Google "worst walking city in the US," "worst commuting city in the US," and "worst bicycling city in the US," and I guarantee you you'll get hits on the Tampa Bay area.
Let me sum up: bicycling does not work everywhere.
A few problems with bicycles:
1) Range. Granted, I live in the Tampa Bay Area in Florida, where commutes are typically rated worse than anywhere else in the US, but I commute 16.9 miles each way to work--and that's with six miles on I-75, where nothing under 5 BHP is allowed (even the strongest riders average 1/2 to 1 BHP). Dropping I-75 from the route would add 1-2 miles to the run. If my boss had a shower at the office, or didn't mind me arriving in a pool of sweat, I'd consider it.
2) Passenger capacity. 99 percent of bikes have a passenger capacity of, well, one. Granted, I don't have kids, but if I want to give someone a ride--say, a client to lunch, it's a no-go.
3) Cargo space. Panniers and other saddlebags can improve cargo capacity from basically zero to at most 1 to 1.5 cubic feet. Not enough for a grocery run. I could get a trike, of course, with up to 2 cubic feet, but that would slow the commute even further than a typical road bike.
LimeWire could potentially be used for illegal content sharing. So can computers, so the RIAA should sue all the computer manufacturers. For that matter, all users could potentially share illegal files so they'd better sue all of us as well.
Also, pirates are actually BENEFITING the environment by not buying and then trashing hard-to-recycle packaging. Piracy also has little to no effect on wildlife. The economic percussions are sketchy at best; odds are, if you're not a publisher, you're not hurting at all. So your attempt at retrofitting the analogy fails.
Slashdot Mirror
Will they ever allow us to hide the useless download bar? And will there be a version that doesn't gradually suck up all our system resources?
Would the follow-up be Noninvasive Oral Compound Obstructing Wall-Blocking Organisms, Yahoo? (It's really hard to come up with relevant medical terms that start with "Y.")
One big difference: Governments generally have some accountability to the people, at least on paper.
Since Congress, now a wholly owned subsidiary of the telecoms, wants to give them a direct connection between their hands and our pockets, and since the FCC and Congress cannot seem to agree on who should control what, I propose that the correct answer is that you and I should control the Internet. We need to figure out a way to build very inexpensive weatherproof low-power WiMAX routers that we can install rapidly--pretty much everywhere. We need to seed them in so many places that nobody can take them all down. The airwaves are the property of everyone, not just a select few. It's time we proved that.
Well, if you're gonna rock out with a metaphor, I always like the Kevin & Kell approach: referring to Windows as a "scratching post" for malware. Posted from my Windows 7 desktop---oh noes!!!
The original definition of Plug and Play as a marketing term was the concept that if a user plugs in a hardware peripheral, like a printer, scanner, microphone, etc., it should tell Windows what it is and Windows should automatically make it work. As far as I know, there were never any documents identifying Plug and Play with, say, software, much less malware code.
Then don't use them to license your products. They're pretty useful to others, though. Or did they hurt you in some way? Show me on the body of your work where the bad licenses touched you...
If I don't write software in the first place, then how is it my problem if Windows isn't well-written? If I buy a car, it's because I myself can't build one. If I buy an operating system, it's because I myself can't write one. Speaking frankly here, it's pretty fatuous to assume that everyone who can use a tool reasonably well has to be able to make that same tool. How many people buy screwdrivers if they can make their own?
Idiocracy.
Governments have a responsibility to do that to protect the rights of their constituents. Governments do not inherently and SHOULD NOT have rights. Ever.
VideoLAN wrote their own damn code. By your logic, then, AOL (oh, excuse me, "Aol") have no complaint coming. -- Remember, you can't spell "asshole" without AOL
Personally, I seriously doubt that the individual shareholders had too much to do with the gundecking of the safety protocols that led to this debacle. Solution: we find those responsible, which most likely will include the current occupants of the head offices at BP, Transocean, and Halliburton, put them out in the Gulf and let them come back when they've properly cleaned up their mess--not before.
I've got a solution: Upon conviction, sentence ALL of BP, Transocean, and Halliburton upper management to clean up the Gulf. Duration: Until it's at least as clean as it was before April 20. Take whatever BP owed them under their contracts before their convictions, PLUS all their current assets and split it up among the cleanup crews who aren't there on a chain gang. They get basic food, shelter, and medical care--and neon pink, orange and yellow HAZMAT suits so they're harder to lose track of. It's for their protection, after all; we wouldn't want them to get lost. After they're done cleaning up the Gulf, they're free to save up to buy property along the Gulf Coast.
Owing more on your house than it's worth has a negative impact on your credit rating, whether you're current on your payments or not. So any employer who does what you say ("checks credit ratings") will view you negatively.
Unless I'm not looking for work because I like my current job and don't have any respect for your opinion.
Rental prices are down compared to last year. Also, it's been 2 years now that landlords have taken tenants who have gone through the foreclosure route. You've been living in la-la land if you haven't noticed it. Landlords are settling for a lot less than they used to.
Yes, insulting me further is just about guaranteed to win me over to whatever it is you're saying. Did you miss the part about me not wanting to change houses OR jobs?
As for the rest, it's all been in the news for the last year. Just look for it. Or don't you know how to search?
I never had the need to search. The burden of proof was on you. Yes, your facts are lined up so that if I wanted to do something I don't want to do, I could do it with somewhat less of a negative impact than I thought. Of course, if I moved, I could keep my job and still change over, but I still don't want to move, because I like my house, underwater as I currently am on the mortgage. So yes, I know how to search. Do you know how not to be obnoxious? Please prove it.
Again, I don't want to move or change jobs just so I can risk my ass on Hillsborough County streets. In fact, because you've been so irritating about insisting that I change my lifestyle to suit you and ride a bike everywhere I go, I'm not saving up for a %^&* black Cadillac Escalade with 22" spinners, extra chrome, Truck Nutz® and your $%^&* email address printed in 400-point type across the back.
And a matching one for my wife in gold.
My lifestyle may be carbon-neutral even without the twin GMT-820s, but at least I'm not an Internet Environmentalist(TM) who goes around imposing his lifestyle on others. I'm not here belittling you because you can't drive. I'm here belittling you because you're too thick to understand that a)Hillsborough County roads are not safe for cyclists; b)I'm not ready to change residences; c)I'm not ready to change jobs; and d)when someone gets obnoxious about wanting me to do something, no matter HOW good it would be for me and the universe, I have a tendency to do the exact opposite. So how about you get on your kitted-out touring bike or whatever and pedal down to your natural food store and buy a nice tall glass of completely organic, animal-suffering-free, carbon-neutral STFU?
"Lust for cheap oil"?! We just want to work to earn money to feed our families and have a place to live! You're attacking the wrong people.
1. I. don't. want. a. different. house. I don't want the financial and legal entanglements that come with walking away from a mortgage. So forget about changing jobs for the next 10 years, because that's how long it will take for housing prices to recover. If I continue to make payments on the house, it won't have any negative effect on my job prospects. You're now arguing against yourself. People owning rental properties have found they can't afford to be as fussy as they used to be, because if they are, then THEY will end up with vacant units that end up being repossessed. The market has changed - and we're only about half-way through the house repossessions - if that. And I'm sure they can be convinced of that...eventually, but probably not by someone walking into their office looking for an apartment because they've just walked away from a mortgage. It would be about like the proprietor of a fruit stand selling fruit to someone on a net-30 invoice on the strength of that buyer's previous orders, which include a huge pile of unpaid papayas left rotting on the side of a road. Millions are doing it and reporting less stress, more money for essentials like food and clothing, increased job mobility, and they're able to clear off their other debts while living basically rent-free. They will be the future consumers, not someone who owes twice what their current house is worth. Show me these millions. Name me a few hundred thousand and show me sworn affadavits. And as for the "They will be the future consumers, not someone who owes twice what their current house is worth," ...prove that too. I'll wait. Until then, it's just rhetoric from someone who wants me to rebuild my entire life around a bicycle.
Employers aren't going to look at someone who's qualified and say "don't hire them - they walked away from an under-water mortgage".
You haven't tried to get a job in finance or with the government, have you? Money problems are a HUGE red flag to US employers, especially in industries where financial responsibility is part of the organization's reputation. So, basically, you're wrong.
You need to learn some reading comprehension. I never said you didn't shower. Here's, word-for-word, what I wrote - "You need to shower anyways - and since you'll be healthier, you'll use fewer medical resources down the road." The "healthier" was obviously in reference to riding a bike on a daily basis. Duh. The benefits aren't just saving energy.
You're the one who should be ashamed, for lying so brazenly, not me.
Bite me. I haven't lied one bit. I misinterpreted your little comment as an insult, which given the fact that I'm increasingly of the opinion that you're a pissant troll, would be easy to do. "You need to shower anyway" can be interpreted two ways, and if you can't see the other one, well, that's consistent with your "my way or the highway" narrative so far.
Screw you. It's people like you that annoy people like me into going out and getting BIGGER cars.
You either aren't getting it, or you're among the most sophisticated trolls in Slashdot history. 1. I. don't. want. a. different. house. I don't want the financial and legal entanglements that come with walking away from a mortgage. And where am I supposed to live during those two years while qualifying for a new house? An apartment? Who's going to rent to someone who welshes on a mortgage? You? I hope so, because every other landlord checks credit, and I don't see them handing out rental agreements to people who dump their mortgages. 2. Millions of people like American Idol too, but that doesn't make it a great idea. As Chris Rock says about single parenthood: "Yes, you can do it, but that don't mean it's to be done." 3. Even if your logic weren't one great big huge nonsequitur, what are all the people who walk away supposed to do for housing and jobs? Employers aren't suddenly going to look at walk-away people and say, "Oh, these people are doing something good for the economy! Let me ignore my HR department and hire them right away!" 4. I shower plenty now, thank you. That was a stupid and mean personal attack from you, and you should be ashamed. Seriously, if you want me to give up my car, you've got to stop coming up with bad ideas and terrible excuses, and start rebuilding the entire infrastructure of this country so that cars simply aren't necessary. I'll help, but I'm not just going to dump my current life and obligations because some would-be Internet Thoreau says I should.
Yes, technically 7 to 10 years of reduced credit availability and much higher interest rates still qualifies as "temporary," but it still does not make the prospect of biking to work very attractive. Again, to sum up here, you're basically suggesting that, for the privilege of biking to work, I either: a) change jobs in a down economy; or b) take a massive credit hit by walking away from my mortgage to move closer to work. For that privilege, I can look forward to inattentive or even hostile motorists putting my life in danger; the need to shower--and use extra water, thus meaning I'm still using lots and lots of resources (and I just know you'll insist I only use the absolute lowest flow shower, thus guaranteeing I'll still carry street funk afterward); the need to change clothes, increasing my laundry loads every week (using both more power and water!); and no protection from rain. The funny thing is, I LIKE bicycling, but it's just not feasible for me to use for commuting, for all the reasons stated above and more. I'd rather save money and simply have my car retrofitted with the latest efficient-energy technology when it becomes readily available.
You and I think alike in this matter.
1. It often specifies serious penalties when you do that too, and doesn't mention what it does to your credit rating (hint: usually around -200 points); 2. I'm happy for you. Good on ya. Seriously. That doesn't make your advice any good for me.
I don't walk away from my financial commitments. I hope that's not how you do business.
It's a nice idea in theory, but in theory, Gozilla's just another lizard. ;)
Seriously, changing jobs in the current U.S. economy and changing houses when one is upside down on the mortgage are nontrivial. Believe me, I wish I were that adaptable, but no.
As far as the shopping cart idea, that sounds like a great way of radically increasing stopping distance and turning radius--and of slinging canned items all over the road when one hits a decent bump or pothole.
There's also the fact that even though there are now signs up in parts of the city reminding people that Florida Statutes 316 and 317 contain a section that requires auto drivers to give cyclists a three-foot berth, the combination of drivers using cell phones, drivers just plain oblivious to their surroundings, and drivers who seem to actively hate cyclists make bicycling a nonstarter in most of eastern Hillsborough County. And no, bike routes are not available in most of the area--the same oblivious drivers who run over cyclists also don't want to pay the additional taxes. I'm not defending the system, mind you; just advising you what I'm up against when I complain of the difficulty of implementing your ideas in my area. Seriously, Google "worst walking city in the US," "worst commuting city in the US," and "worst bicycling city in the US," and I guarantee you you'll get hits on the Tampa Bay area.
Let me sum up: bicycling does not work everywhere.
A few problems with bicycles: 1) Range. Granted, I live in the Tampa Bay Area in Florida, where commutes are typically rated worse than anywhere else in the US, but I commute 16.9 miles each way to work--and that's with six miles on I-75, where nothing under 5 BHP is allowed (even the strongest riders average 1/2 to 1 BHP). Dropping I-75 from the route would add 1-2 miles to the run. If my boss had a shower at the office, or didn't mind me arriving in a pool of sweat, I'd consider it. 2) Passenger capacity. 99 percent of bikes have a passenger capacity of, well, one. Granted, I don't have kids, but if I want to give someone a ride--say, a client to lunch, it's a no-go. 3) Cargo space. Panniers and other saddlebags can improve cargo capacity from basically zero to at most 1 to 1.5 cubic feet. Not enough for a grocery run. I could get a trike, of course, with up to 2 cubic feet, but that would slow the commute even further than a typical road bike.
LimeWire could potentially be used for illegal content sharing. So can computers, so the RIAA should sue all the computer manufacturers. For that matter, all users could potentially share illegal files so they'd better sue all of us as well.
Also, pirates are actually BENEFITING the environment by not buying and then trashing hard-to-recycle packaging. Piracy also has little to no effect on wildlife. The economic percussions are sketchy at best; odds are, if you're not a publisher, you're not hurting at all. So your attempt at retrofitting the analogy fails.