And Evolutionists have NEVER falsified data to prove their point. Right? Evolutionists never hide data that is outlying points that don't fit their current model... right?
IF you say, that both sides have falsified data, then we can start having a discussion. Until then, implying one side is perfect while the other side manipulates data to suit their needs is misguided and as wrong as you imply about creationists and over simplification.
I remember being taught that fossilization took thousands of years. Is that true? Why would science say such a thing with certainty when it is not accurate at all? Science auto corrects itself over time, but it has proposed plenty of things that were in error and continues to do so even today.
First Century Christians were, for the most part, Jews, practicing Judaism of the day. Today, most Christians are NOT Jews, and practicing the sun god cult of Rome.
I tell people to buy the least expensive acceptable model. Save the $ for the next purchase or else something worthwhile. My reason? Laptops, cheap ones, usually will do everything people want. AND when the crap goes south in a year, after the warranty is gone, you won't be as heart broken as if you spent upwards of $2000 for a really really nice laptop with all the bells and whistles.
Right now, you can get a Core i3 2.3 Ghz with 4-6 GB ram for about $500-600. Really, what more is a non-techie gonna need? I get people dropbox or box or some other cloud storage for their "stuff", and quite frankly, most people will be just fine with something like that. There are exceptions, but really, most people would be fine with that.
At that price range, you can buy 3 laptops for the price of the Macs people are recommending above.
Blocking Ads is a result of too many sites trying too hard to "monetize" a site. It is what I call the "rule of assholes". The Rule of Assholes goes like this: Any thing that is legitimate and good can be ruined by assholes. In fact, that is my definition of what an Asshole is; they ruin it (for normal values of "it") for everyone else.
Ads done right, are unobtrusive and might even ad value to a site. However Assholes come along and splatter and plaster the most annoying adverts all over negligible sites. Worse is the fact that often times they don't even vet the advertisers so that they become a vector of malware payloads, and ruin it for everyone else. The result is that you HAVE to run your browser with AdBlock enabled just to have a reasonable surfing experience.
You want to run ads on your site? Sell banner/ad space yourself, serve it yourself and most adblock software won't bother blocking your adverts. It costs more in time and energy, but that is the cost of all the assholes in the world ruining things for everyone else.
I'd watch ads if they weren't so obnoxiously intrusive to the program I'm trying to watch. I've quit TV over Ads, and now watch exclusively HULU and Netflix. The last straw for me was watching a show, don't remember which, and having a three minute commercial, followed by four minutes of program followed by five minutes of commercial... I kid you not. When a 1/2 hour show is really only about 14.5 minutes long (time it, not counting intro and ending credits), you spend more time NOT watching the program than actually watching it. My time is worth more to me than being peppered with stupid ads, commercials for crappy shows (while they cancel every good show I like). I mean Jersey Shore is going on what... 8 season now, but the cancel Firefly after two? No thanks, I'll pass.
I do that, except I'll go back every couple minutes or so and say.. can you hold on, I really want to talk to you, but I have to finish this one thing..
I keep a log of how long they will hang on... the current record, for some insurance company, was nearly 35 minutes before they hung up. They did call back three time afterwards... but didn't hold on much more than a couple minutes.
My goal, keep them online, but not making a sale for as long as I can. If everyone took 30 minutes for each of these sales type calls and never actually buying, then they would stop calling, as the profit margins would sink.
I had a similar call about a month ago. My wife answered it and then hung up. I wish she would have handed the phone to me. I would have had a field day, acting stupid, and getting as much info as I could so that I could return their "favor".
Many Android Phones using stock Google Code do not account for the issue of the leap seconds. Other versions of Android (Cyanogenmod) do have the correct time. There is even an app that fixes this problem for rooted phones. Just because they have access to this information doesn't mean they use it;)
Don't take my word for it, take Neil DeGrasse Tyson's...
The problem is "IF" leads to "false" conclusions, WHEN the premises are not true.
In your example the premises (2+2, 5) are provable. IF the premises are provable then the answer is no longer hypothetical. 2+2 = 4, any other answer is wrong, no hypothesis are needed.;) However, since I would not answer 2+2=5 under normal conditions, your question's assumption that I would, is false.;) Thus the hypothetical question is indeed false (misleading). So the answer is "hypothetically speaking, yes, I would be wrong. However, your assumption that I would answer 5 is also wrong, so no"
Hypothetical questions as Boolean constraints is fine, but that is not the extent of hypothetical questions and their ability to draw people into false conclusions. The boolean construct for your question is A = B and and B C, then A C is true (or A = C is false).
Please understand, I get Boolean mathematics. that is not my point.
So the A/C above you says they hated me because I was stupid, and you say they didn't hate me at all. Which is it?;)
And in the mean time, you completely missed my point...
This is important because people often base hypothetical questions as "fact", and thus trap people into thinking the logic of the question is "true" and thus the whole premise is "true" when in fact, it was just a hypothetical question, with a false premise, of which the answer... by default... should have been in the negative.
Actually, the hypothetical question here is an example of why hypothetical questions are to be answered negatively from the outset. Had it been so, then the answer would have been "no" because (please review above response) there was no proof of the assumptions;) Thus the "view" is assumed (oscillating EM) is false, as the premise. However by actually DOING the experiments correctly, you would realize that when doing the "view" in reality, the view is not what was expected... hence... relativity. Einstein was correct, and so am I.;)
GPS is NOT accurate for sufficient levels of accuracy. It is currently off by about 15 seconds and every time they do a leap second, it requires a reprogramming of the device/OS to account for it. GPS basically SUCKS for atomic time. It is better to use NTP or the Atomic Clock shortwave signal, which already are using the corrected time.
Point your DCs to pool.ntp.org and be done. Standard config out of the box for our DCs! Everything else is... automagic.
It doesn't take competent Sysadmin, just a good SOP for setting up new DC's. Just another "checkbox" on the list. You do have a checklist for setting up new DCs for your org.. don't you? If not, your IT supervisor should be fired.
No, but hypothetically speaking yes. One cannot answer hypothetical questions correctly, since they offer no "truth" (the "yes") from which to derive an answer.
The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I was right. ALL hypothetical questions must be answered hypothetically. The question in class were usually something like "If all cats are dogs and all dogs are horses, are all cats horses?", the hypothetical answer is "yes" but in reality (truth) is no. And I would answer them that way. Thus, all hypothetical questions are outside the framework of Truth, even if they are "true".. hypothetically speaking.
This is important because people often base hypothetical questions as "fact", and thus trap people into thinking the logic of the question is "true" and thus the whole premise is "true" when in fact, it was just a hypothetical question, with a false premise, of which the answer... by default... should have been in the negative.
In your case, the question is in fact NOT a Headline (unless you offer evidence to the contrary), so the answer is "no" since it is not a headline, the premise is false, therefore the answer should be false/negative. You offer a classic example of why hypothetical questions are misleading. However, the correct answer is "hypothetically speaking... yes"
All Taxes are regressive. The rich can always avoid some (most) taxes, while the poor cannot avoid any. The progressive liberals keep thinking that taxes on the wealthy hurt the wealthy, when they hurt those the wealthy employ.
Case in point, the "luxury" tax on new Yachts and the like. When the tax was engaged, the rich simply stopped buying those items, killing the industries targeted, and causing unemployment as companies laid off workers due to much lower demands for said Luxuries. The tax was quickly repealed when it diddn't raise anywhere near the amount of revenue it claimed, and the corresponding loss of revenue and unemployment benefits out weighed the revenue it did generate.
The problem is, the Laffer Curve is more than accurate, however we are just left guessing at where "maximum revenue" is generated. My thesis is that revenue is maxed out when people are willing to endure taxes for the things they want (not need), which is one of the reasons I'm fairly Libertarian on things like currently illicit pharmaceuticals. Legalize drugs, create jobs and industry in the process, tax (and regulate) the crap out of them, and use the revenue to fund government. At some point, the Laffer Curve kicks in, and people STOP doing drugs (good thing) and revenue starts to decline (see Cigarettes for example).
IF you do this for all products / services deemed "harmful" to society, but otherwise "victimless", such as Alcohol, Drugs, Porn and Prostitution, we'd have all the money to do all the things we want as a society. And taxes become "voluntary" for all, including the poor. You won't have to pay taxes if you don't want what is taxed.
The problem with people like you, is that the moment people cite any facts that impact immigration negatively, they are labeled "hate" by the SLPC. From the SPLC own website...
Other hate groups on the list target gays or immigrants
I bet you don't even see the problem with that. You're a "hate group" if you mention facts about illegal immigration problems. Self fulfilling much?
Re:Disgraced Republican Candidate for Governor
on
HP To Cut 30,000 Jobs
·
· Score: 1
High Speed Rail was a (D) product, not an (R). It is a huge boondogle in the making, and yet NONE of the current (D) leaders want to just kill it before it gets worse, and they haven't even started building it. If the (D) want HSR so bad, why don't they offer tax increases to support it? They own the legislature and governor's office, don't they? Can't put that one on the (R)
The Referendum process has helped the (D) party much more than the (R) party, Prop 13 being the big exception.
These articles suggest that the cost to CA for illegal immigrants is about 9-10 BILLION, while the state deficit is around 16 billion. The math is clear.
Pete Wilson was NOT a fiscal conservative, and he was liberal socially, except for a few rare examples, including those you cited. By citing similarly scant evidence, I bet I could make Jerry Brown look like a conservative.In fact, I know I can!;)
Except you can't count on Dividends always existing. Plenty of stock used to pay dividends and is no longer even around, mainly because they kept paying dividends even when they were losing money, causing a double decline of working capital, hastening their death.
P/E ratio is a good first indicator of real value. Most stocks trade in the 10 to 25 PE ratio. Followed by Growth indicators. In almost all cases, valuation of stock prices is has very little influence based on historical Dividend payouts, because of the nature of those payouts, the rare exception are public utilities that have other problems regarding P/E ratios, heavy government regulations and and lack of long term growth opportunities.
Basically most modern investors think Dividends are an opportunity cost, and not a benefit.
Slashdot Mirror
And Evolutionists have NEVER falsified data to prove their point. Right? Evolutionists never hide data that is outlying points that don't fit their current model ... right?
IF you say, that both sides have falsified data, then we can start having a discussion. Until then, implying one side is perfect while the other side manipulates data to suit their needs is misguided and as wrong as you imply about creationists and over simplification.
I remember being taught that fossilization took thousands of years. Is that true? Why would science say such a thing with certainty when it is not accurate at all? Science auto corrects itself over time, but it has proposed plenty of things that were in error and continues to do so even today.
First Century Christians were, for the most part, Jews, practicing Judaism of the day. Today, most Christians are NOT Jews, and practicing the sun god cult of Rome.
I tell people to buy the least expensive acceptable model. Save the $ for the next purchase or else something worthwhile. My reason? Laptops, cheap ones, usually will do everything people want. AND when the crap goes south in a year, after the warranty is gone, you won't be as heart broken as if you spent upwards of $2000 for a really really nice laptop with all the bells and whistles.
Right now, you can get a Core i3 2.3 Ghz with 4-6 GB ram for about $500-600. Really, what more is a non-techie gonna need? I get people dropbox or box or some other cloud storage for their "stuff", and quite frankly, most people will be just fine with something like that. There are exceptions, but really, most people would be fine with that.
At that price range, you can buy 3 laptops for the price of the Macs people are recommending above.
That explains much. Thanks
Blocking Ads is a result of too many sites trying too hard to "monetize" a site. It is what I call the "rule of assholes". The Rule of Assholes goes like this: Any thing that is legitimate and good can be ruined by assholes. In fact, that is my definition of what an Asshole is; they ruin it (for normal values of "it") for everyone else.
Ads done right, are unobtrusive and might even ad value to a site. However Assholes come along and splatter and plaster the most annoying adverts all over negligible sites. Worse is the fact that often times they don't even vet the advertisers so that they become a vector of malware payloads, and ruin it for everyone else. The result is that you HAVE to run your browser with AdBlock enabled just to have a reasonable surfing experience.
You want to run ads on your site? Sell banner/ad space yourself, serve it yourself and most adblock software won't bother blocking your adverts. It costs more in time and energy, but that is the cost of all the assholes in the world ruining things for everyone else.
I'd watch ads if they weren't so obnoxiously intrusive to the program I'm trying to watch. I've quit TV over Ads, and now watch exclusively HULU and Netflix. The last straw for me was watching a show, don't remember which, and having a three minute commercial, followed by four minutes of program followed by five minutes of commercial ... I kid you not. When a 1/2 hour show is really only about 14.5 minutes long (time it, not counting intro and ending credits), you spend more time NOT watching the program than actually watching it. My time is worth more to me than being peppered with stupid ads, commercials for crappy shows (while they cancel every good show I like). I mean Jersey Shore is going on what ... 8 season now, but the cancel Firefly after two? No thanks, I'll pass.
I do that, except I'll go back every couple minutes or so and say .. can you hold on, I really want to talk to you, but I have to finish this one thing ..
I keep a log of how long they will hang on ... the current record, for some insurance company, was nearly 35 minutes before they hung up. They did call back three time afterwards ... but didn't hold on much more than a couple minutes.
My goal, keep them online, but not making a sale for as long as I can. If everyone took 30 minutes for each of these sales type calls and never actually buying, then they would stop calling, as the profit margins would sink.
I had a similar call about a month ago. My wife answered it and then hung up. I wish she would have handed the phone to me. I would have had a field day, acting stupid, and getting as much info as I could so that I could return their "favor".
Touche'
Many Android Phones using stock Google Code do not account for the issue of the leap seconds. Other versions of Android (Cyanogenmod) do have the correct time. There is even an app that fixes this problem for rooted phones. Just because they have access to this information doesn't mean they use it ;)
Don't take my word for it, take Neil DeGrasse Tyson's ...
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2012-03-29/tech/31252904_1_android-phones-gps-satellites-iphone
Boolean Math I get. :-D My problem lies with false premises being asserted as facts ... which is done all the time as "hypothetical questions"
The problem is "IF" leads to "false" conclusions, WHEN the premises are not true.
In your example the premises (2+2, 5) are provable. IF the premises are provable then the answer is no longer hypothetical. 2+2 = 4, any other answer is wrong, no hypothesis are needed. ;) However, since I would not answer 2+2=5 under normal conditions, your question's assumption that I would, is false. ;) Thus the hypothetical question is indeed false (misleading). So the answer is "hypothetically speaking, yes, I would be wrong. However, your assumption that I would answer 5 is also wrong, so no"
Hypothetical questions as Boolean constraints is fine, but that is not the extent of hypothetical questions and their ability to draw people into false conclusions. The boolean construct for your question is A = B and and B C, then A C is true (or A = C is false).
Please understand, I get Boolean mathematics. that is not my point.
So the A/C above you says they hated me because I was stupid, and you say they didn't hate me at all. Which is it? ;)
And in the mean time, you completely missed my point ...
Now you're talking Boolean Math, which IS provable.
Actually, the hypothetical question here is an example of why hypothetical questions are to be answered negatively from the outset. Had it been so, then the answer would have been "no" because (please review above response) there was no proof of the assumptions ;) Thus the "view" is assumed (oscillating EM) is false, as the premise. However by actually DOING the experiments correctly, you would realize that when doing the "view" in reality, the view is not what was expected ... hence ... relativity. Einstein was correct, and so am I. ;)
GPS is NOT accurate for sufficient levels of accuracy. It is currently off by about 15 seconds and every time they do a leap second, it requires a reprogramming of the device/OS to account for it. GPS basically SUCKS for atomic time. It is better to use NTP or the Atomic Clock shortwave signal, which already are using the corrected time.
Point your DCs to pool.ntp.org and be done. Standard config out of the box for our DCs! Everything else is ... automagic.
It doesn't take competent Sysadmin, just a good SOP for setting up new DC's. Just another "checkbox" on the list. You do have a checklist for setting up new DCs for your org .. don't you? If not, your IT supervisor should be fired.
So, what you're saying is that it has to be a QT/PI ?
No, but hypothetically speaking yes. One cannot answer hypothetical questions correctly, since they offer no "truth" (the "yes") from which to derive an answer.
The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I was right. ALL hypothetical questions must be answered hypothetically. The question in class were usually something like "If all cats are dogs and all dogs are horses, are all cats horses?", the hypothetical answer is "yes" but in reality (truth) is no. And I would answer them that way. Thus, all hypothetical questions are outside the framework of Truth, even if they are "true" .. hypothetically speaking.
This is important because people often base hypothetical questions as "fact", and thus trap people into thinking the logic of the question is "true" and thus the whole premise is "true" when in fact, it was just a hypothetical question, with a false premise, of which the answer ... by default ... should have been in the negative.
In your case, the question is in fact NOT a Headline (unless you offer evidence to the contrary), so the answer is "no" since it is not a headline, the premise is false, therefore the answer should be false/negative. You offer a classic example of why hypothetical questions are misleading. However, the correct answer is "hypothetically speaking ... yes"
All Taxes are regressive. The rich can always avoid some (most) taxes, while the poor cannot avoid any. The progressive liberals keep thinking that taxes on the wealthy hurt the wealthy, when they hurt those the wealthy employ.
Case in point, the "luxury" tax on new Yachts and the like. When the tax was engaged, the rich simply stopped buying those items, killing the industries targeted, and causing unemployment as companies laid off workers due to much lower demands for said Luxuries. The tax was quickly repealed when it diddn't raise anywhere near the amount of revenue it claimed, and the corresponding loss of revenue and unemployment benefits out weighed the revenue it did generate.
The problem is, the Laffer Curve is more than accurate, however we are just left guessing at where "maximum revenue" is generated. My thesis is that revenue is maxed out when people are willing to endure taxes for the things they want (not need), which is one of the reasons I'm fairly Libertarian on things like currently illicit pharmaceuticals. Legalize drugs, create jobs and industry in the process, tax (and regulate) the crap out of them, and use the revenue to fund government. At some point, the Laffer Curve kicks in, and people STOP doing drugs (good thing) and revenue starts to decline (see Cigarettes for example).
IF you do this for all products / services deemed "harmful" to society, but otherwise "victimless", such as Alcohol, Drugs, Porn and Prostitution, we'd have all the money to do all the things we want as a society. And taxes become "voluntary" for all, including the poor. You won't have to pay taxes if you don't want what is taxed.
Or at least a JATO unit
So, unless you're "Pro Porn" you're a luddite? Can you explain that further?
SPLC is a hate group. And yet they don't list themselves as one, I wonder why.
http://www.cis.org/node/54
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/feb/02/local/me-cap2
http://webworks.typepad.com/lakecountyfiscalrangers/2010/06/cost-of-illegal-immigrants-from-a-california-teacher-working-in-a-title-1-school.html
http://sosguy.net/articles/264
http://www.bakersfieldnow.com/news/investigations/122630554.html
http://capoliticalnews.com/2012/03/06/antonovich-la-county-cost-for-illegal-aliens-is-1-6-billion-per-year/
The problem with people like you, is that the moment people cite any facts that impact immigration negatively, they are labeled "hate" by the SLPC. From the SPLC own website ...
Other hate groups on the list target gays or immigrants
I bet you don't even see the problem with that. You're a "hate group" if you mention facts about illegal immigration problems. Self fulfilling much?
High Speed Rail was a (D) product, not an (R). It is a huge boondogle in the making, and yet NONE of the current (D) leaders want to just kill it before it gets worse, and they haven't even started building it. If the (D) want HSR so bad, why don't they offer tax increases to support it? They own the legislature and governor's office, don't they? Can't put that one on the (R)
The Referendum process has helped the (D) party much more than the (R) party, Prop 13 being the big exception.
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/immigrationnaturalizatio/a/caillegals.htm
http://www.capsweb.org/content.php?id=308&menu_id=8
http://www.nctimes.com/news/article_5cedf831-9d5d-5335-af7e-2af6730a577c.html
These articles suggest that the cost to CA for illegal immigrants is about 9-10 BILLION, while the state deficit is around 16 billion. The math is clear.
Pete Wilson was NOT a fiscal conservative, and he was liberal socially, except for a few rare examples, including those you cited. By citing similarly scant evidence, I bet I could make Jerry Brown look like a conservative.In fact, I know I can! ;)
Except you can't count on Dividends always existing. Plenty of stock used to pay dividends and is no longer even around, mainly because they kept paying dividends even when they were losing money, causing a double decline of working capital, hastening their death.
P/E ratio is a good first indicator of real value. Most stocks trade in the 10 to 25 PE ratio. Followed by Growth indicators. In almost all cases, valuation of stock prices is has very little influence based on historical Dividend payouts, because of the nature of those payouts, the rare exception are public utilities that have other problems regarding P/E ratios, heavy government regulations and and lack of long term growth opportunities.
Basically most modern investors think Dividends are an opportunity cost, and not a benefit.