That is hardly the "worst thing" about WebOS. The worst thing was it couldn't do simple things like join a Enterprise Wireless network like Android of iOS could, you know, by pointing to the WAP and filling in credentials and so on. Then it wouldn't authenticate against Exchange 2010 properly, like Android and iOS could with their Exchange Connectors.
I got my hands on one this week for the first time, after spending an hour fiddling around, scouring forums and beating my head on the wall... I just gave up. (No, installing all the company owned CERTS didn't help, so don't even suggest that) .
I told the guy who got one (given away, brand new) No wonder HP quit developing it, nobody would actually pay for this crap. NOT being able to use the thing is the worst possible outcome for a device such as this.
You mean like Random Reboots? Oh trust me, the carriers and OEMs just point back to each other on it, or blame some software I've installed.
My Droid randomly reboots. Just enough to be annoying when it happens, but not often enough to try to chase the bug. I'd be on a custom rom if they had a decent one for my phone (X) but the locked boot loader is only partially cracked (from what I've seen).
I'm aware of Polynesian customs, including the value they placed on women. So much so, that if a family had all boys, One culture had it so the youngest would be turned into a "girl", and it ended up being "honored", interestingly enough, that "girl" was not an object of sexual desires nor necessarily a homosexual. However, if it was the case that he was "gay", it would indicate that homosexuality is more "cultural" than something one was born to be, something homosexuals have been fighting against their whole lives. Which is why most informed gay people don't bring up Polynesian Culture.
Additionally Many Polynesians also practiced Cannibalism, I wouldn't use (their) ancient traditions as proof that it is normal;)
I read the Wikipedia article. It wasn't specific allegation that Issa committed the Arson, just that it was Arson. And I'm not saying Issa is innocent, I don't know if he is or isn't. However I was asking about the "criminal" label being applied to someone not convicted of a crime. Do you consider Obama a criminal for the scam known as Solyndra? Or Senators profiting via IPOs while passing (or blocking) legislation that would affect their HUGE profits they made on those IPOs? Or Lying before congress and the American People? Or tax evasion on property that most Americans could never dream of owning by life long politicians? Or...
Do you not trust them either? Or do they get a pass because they are (D) like you? My guess is that you don't like Issa because he is an (R) and you bring up the Arson to support it, while you ignore actual (often convicted) criminals that are (D) because you like them.
"Marriage, in common law, is the merging of two legal entities into two halves of a single legal entity."
This is historically wrong. Marriage has always been between men and women. I don't know a single culture that included homosexual "unions" as a norm. Additionally, there is more historical evidence for polygamy than anything resembling homosexual unions. Common law marriage was between a man and woman.
Further, the purposes of marriage laws were to protect FAMILY (mom, dad, kids) and the wife's widowhood. Since by definition, homosexuals cannot have children of their own, there is no compelling reason to allow for marriage between them. Now granted, homosexual couples can go for donors or adoption, but that brings up additional legal ramifications. There is no compelling reason why society should support homosexual unions the same way as for heterosexual unions.
Interestingly enough, most proponents of homosexual marriage are against polygamy or polyandry or other forms of "plural" marriages. Arbitrary indeed. I did notice that you simply went to the extreme example I provided, and bypassed this one.
But please, do not mistake what I'm saying as opposition to homosexuality, personally I don't care what two people do in the privacy of their own home. Further, I would suggest to you that Marriage is a sacred (religious) institution historically, and that government should have no business sanctioning or restricting marriage at all, but rather it should be left to sacred/religious organizations. Government should not favor or disfavor people based on marital status.
This means that if there is a legal framework for sacred (religious) marriage, that it should be done via a legal contract, each one being unique to the people involved. This would give homosexuals and plural marriage advocates all the legal protection they want AND need.
Meaning that everyone pays the exact same price for every procedure, office visit, operation, surgery and band-aid. Not Medicare pays $50, but the guy paying cash pays $1500.
Well, in California, they did pass a State Constitutional Amendment to say Marriage is between one man, and one woman, but that wasn't good enough for those wanting Marriage between two people, as being between one man and one woman is "too arbitrary". Well, hell, I think marriage limit between two people is "arbitrary", I'd love marriage to include men, women and all sorts of furry (an non-furry) farm animals in any quantity. Hell, even farm animals might be too arbitrary.
Anyway the point being, even if you pass a Constitutional Amendment, there are people who will oppose it and try to usurp it, restrict it, limit it, ignore it... and sometimes with violent intentions. And just remember, even if the Constitution allows for something, doesn't mean it is a good thing.
Which is why we should always be mindful of what the Constitution says, and make sure we act accordingly, or change it to suit the new reality. Otherwise, we are simply a country of arbitrary feelings that change with the wind.
So, your assertion of being "criminal" is a vague allegation of arson, and no suspect for that allegation named? Do you hold the Democrats to the same standards of contempt for their criminality? I doubt it.
Range? Because I drive 600 miles on a semi-regular basis, with my family in a fully loaded sedan. No Electric Vehicle comes even reasonably close to this.
It isn't arbitrary metric, it is a real world metric. Top Speed (Assuming you mean 150 MPH, not 35MPH) is not a real world metric, when was the last time you drove your car at its rated top speed (top gear, petal to the metal)?
You're an idiot. Mistakenly assuming that I believe that the killing was less important than the nationality. However, when a country can execute its citizens for some "crime" without a trial, I have a HUGE problem. Death Penalty for a crime deserves a trial. PERIOD.
As for your comment about murder, death, kill, I abhor it. Wars suck, Crime sucks, Life sucks. This wasn't some random guy under some random bomb being kill indiscriminately, which is bad no doubt. This was deliberate targeted execution of a specific individual by his own government, and if you don't see the huge difference between the two, than you are the idiot.
Oh, and I'm glad I made your list of idiots;-) And who is more foolish, the fool or the fool who responds to him?
They* killed a killed a guy for being... "dangerous terrorist". No trial, no judge, no lawyer, no oversight. All they have to do is label people "terrorist" and... bam, license to kill, but I'm the delusional one. Good one.
*They being Obama right now, but I wouldn't put it past any of the (R) people either.
Let me get this straight. You don't think a "politician" would feel "threatened" by a Robodialer enough to put the person on a "Terrorist Watch List" or something? When we can kill a US Citizen with a Military Strike without so much a trial, lawyer or otherwise, you don't think that can translate to killing anyone for anything at any time?
Yes, I'm arguing Slippery Slope, but the fact is, I would NEVER have considered that was even possible a few short years ago. And since it is Obama and not GWB doing it, he gets a pass from the Liberal Establishment Media and no "Obama is a Murderer" signs in front of his vacation home in... where is he this week.. Ah Yes.. Hawaii.
Where are the protests? IF that was GWB, the left would be raising hell over what has come out of the White House in the last week, because the Obama Administration basically said "We don't need no stinken courts" for such actions.This shit is pretty scary when you realize what they are really saying.
And all it takes is for some rotting corpse of a politician to feel threatened to get the ball rolling. BTW, Nancy Pelosi looks like she is perpetually terrified, so I wouldn't be surprised if it she was the first.
SMS is not a good replacement for Two-Factor Security. I use GoogleVoice for my SMS two factor authentication, not my Cell Phone. If I lose my Cell phone, I don't have to worry about someone getting my two-factor authentication codes. My phone uses a different GV number than I use for my Two-Factor Auth.
I rarely us real SMS anymore because GV just is so much more convenient for me.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you realize that while normal is "cultural", without "normal" you have no culture?
Normal = expected behavior.
That is hardly the "worst thing" about WebOS. The worst thing was it couldn't do simple things like join a Enterprise Wireless network like Android of iOS could, you know, by pointing to the WAP and filling in credentials and so on. Then it wouldn't authenticate against Exchange 2010 properly, like Android and iOS could with their Exchange Connectors.
I got my hands on one this week for the first time, after spending an hour fiddling around, scouring forums and beating my head on the wall ... I just gave up. (No, installing all the company owned CERTS didn't help, so don't even suggest that) .
I told the guy who got one (given away, brand new) No wonder HP quit developing it, nobody would actually pay for this crap. NOT being able to use the thing is the worst possible outcome for a device such as this.
You mean like Random Reboots? Oh trust me, the carriers and OEMs just point back to each other on it, or blame some software I've installed.
My Droid randomly reboots. Just enough to be annoying when it happens, but not often enough to try to chase the bug. I'd be on a custom rom if they had a decent one for my phone (X) but the locked boot loader is only partially cracked (from what I've seen).
I'm aware of Polynesian customs, including the value they placed on women. So much so, that if a family had all boys, One culture had it so the youngest would be turned into a "girl", and it ended up being "honored", interestingly enough, that "girl" was not an object of sexual desires nor necessarily a homosexual. However, if it was the case that he was "gay", it would indicate that homosexuality is more "cultural" than something one was born to be, something homosexuals have been fighting against their whole lives. Which is why most informed gay people don't bring up Polynesian Culture.
Additionally Many Polynesians also practiced Cannibalism, I wouldn't use (their) ancient traditions as proof that it is normal ;)
I'm not a (R). I'm (L).
I read the Wikipedia article. It wasn't specific allegation that Issa committed the Arson, just that it was Arson. And I'm not saying Issa is innocent, I don't know if he is or isn't. However I was asking about the "criminal" label being applied to someone not convicted of a crime. Do you consider Obama a criminal for the scam known as Solyndra? Or Senators profiting via IPOs while passing (or blocking) legislation that would affect their HUGE profits they made on those IPOs? Or Lying before congress and the American People? Or tax evasion on property that most Americans could never dream of owning by life long politicians? Or ...
Do you not trust them either? Or do they get a pass because they are (D) like you? My guess is that you don't like Issa because he is an (R) and you bring up the Arson to support it, while you ignore actual (often convicted) criminals that are (D) because you like them.
"Marriage, in common law, is the merging of two legal entities into two halves of a single legal entity."
This is historically wrong. Marriage has always been between men and women. I don't know a single culture that included homosexual "unions" as a norm. Additionally, there is more historical evidence for polygamy than anything resembling homosexual unions. Common law marriage was between a man and woman.
Further, the purposes of marriage laws were to protect FAMILY (mom, dad, kids) and the wife's widowhood. Since by definition, homosexuals cannot have children of their own, there is no compelling reason to allow for marriage between them. Now granted, homosexual couples can go for donors or adoption, but that brings up additional legal ramifications. There is no compelling reason why society should support homosexual unions the same way as for heterosexual unions.
Interestingly enough, most proponents of homosexual marriage are against polygamy or polyandry or other forms of "plural" marriages. Arbitrary indeed. I did notice that you simply went to the extreme example I provided, and bypassed this one.
But please, do not mistake what I'm saying as opposition to homosexuality, personally I don't care what two people do in the privacy of their own home. Further, I would suggest to you that Marriage is a sacred (religious) institution historically, and that government should have no business sanctioning or restricting marriage at all, but rather it should be left to sacred/religious organizations. Government should not favor or disfavor people based on marital status.
This means that if there is a legal framework for sacred (religious) marriage, that it should be done via a legal contract, each one being unique to the people involved. This would give homosexuals and plural marriage advocates all the legal protection they want AND need.
You want to fix Insurance/medical industry ?
Simple fix ... ONE PRICE
Meaning that everyone pays the exact same price for every procedure, office visit, operation, surgery and band-aid. Not Medicare pays $50, but the guy paying cash pays $1500.
Well, in California, they did pass a State Constitutional Amendment to say Marriage is between one man, and one woman, but that wasn't good enough for those wanting Marriage between two people, as being between one man and one woman is "too arbitrary". Well, hell, I think marriage limit between two people is "arbitrary", I'd love marriage to include men, women and all sorts of furry (an non-furry) farm animals in any quantity. Hell, even farm animals might be too arbitrary.
Anyway the point being, even if you pass a Constitutional Amendment, there are people who will oppose it and try to usurp it, restrict it, limit it, ignore it ... and sometimes with violent intentions. And just remember, even if the Constitution allows for something, doesn't mean it is a good thing.
Which is why we should always be mindful of what the Constitution says, and make sure we act accordingly, or change it to suit the new reality. Otherwise, we are simply a country of arbitrary feelings that change with the wind.
So, your assertion of being "criminal" is a vague allegation of arson, and no suspect for that allegation named? Do you hold the Democrats to the same standards of contempt for their criminality? I doubt it.
I don't own a credit card, can't rent a car.
So, if I vote for Libertarian, which is the opposing Party, (D) or (R)???
Or they can kill you because someone says you're a Terrorist? (answer is sadly .. YES).
Voting (D) or (R) results in the same thing. Why anyone votes these two parties any more is beyond me
Range? Because I drive 600 miles on a semi-regular basis, with my family in a fully loaded sedan. No Electric Vehicle comes even reasonably close to this.
It isn't arbitrary metric, it is a real world metric. Top Speed (Assuming you mean 150 MPH, not 35MPH) is not a real world metric, when was the last time you drove your car at its rated top speed (top gear, petal to the metal)?
Periods are messy, but so are colons. oh we're talking punctuation here... never mind
I caused a reaction, which means I affected him enough to cause him to act. :-D
You're an idiot. Mistakenly assuming that I believe that the killing was less important than the nationality. However, when a country can execute its citizens for some "crime" without a trial, I have a HUGE problem. Death Penalty for a crime deserves a trial. PERIOD.
As for your comment about murder, death, kill, I abhor it. Wars suck, Crime sucks, Life sucks. This wasn't some random guy under some random bomb being kill indiscriminately, which is bad no doubt. This was deliberate targeted execution of a specific individual by his own government, and if you don't see the huge difference between the two, than you are the idiot.
Oh, and I'm glad I made your list of idiots ;-) And who is more foolish, the fool or the fool who responds to him?
They* killed a killed a guy for being ... "dangerous terrorist". No trial, no judge, no lawyer, no oversight. All they have to do is label people "terrorist" and ... bam, license to kill, but I'm the delusional one. Good one.
*They being Obama right now, but I wouldn't put it past any of the (R) people either.
I will make it Legal!
I miss playing Bridge.
Let me get this straight. You don't think a "politician" would feel "threatened" by a Robodialer enough to put the person on a "Terrorist Watch List" or something? When we can kill a US Citizen with a Military Strike without so much a trial, lawyer or otherwise, you don't think that can translate to killing anyone for anything at any time?
Yes, I'm arguing Slippery Slope, but the fact is, I would NEVER have considered that was even possible a few short years ago. And since it is Obama and not GWB doing it, he gets a pass from the Liberal Establishment Media and no "Obama is a Murderer" signs in front of his vacation home in ... where is he this week.. Ah Yes .. Hawaii.
Where are the protests? IF that was GWB, the left would be raising hell over what has come out of the White House in the last week, because the Obama Administration basically said "We don't need no stinken courts" for such actions.This shit is pretty scary when you realize what they are really saying.
And all it takes is for some rotting corpse of a politician to feel threatened to get the ball rolling. BTW, Nancy Pelosi looks like she is perpetually terrified, so I wouldn't be surprised if it she was the first.
No!!!
Then we'll kill it for dinner. Back to Extinct for you!
I've noticed, the more proficient I get at Linux, my beard grows thicker and greyer ... I'm no longer thinking it is coincidence.
FTFY
Assume the worst. If you want something private, don't tell ANYONE.
SMS is not a good replacement for Two-Factor Security. I use GoogleVoice for my SMS two factor authentication, not my Cell Phone. If I lose my Cell phone, I don't have to worry about someone getting my two-factor authentication codes. My phone uses a different GV number than I use for my Two-Factor Auth.
I rarely us real SMS anymore because GV just is so much more convenient for me.