Fox news isn't doing anything different from NBC, CBS and ABC. Most notably, exploding trucks, and fake documents. And these are the cases where they got caught.
I'd rather get my news and opinions from people who are knowingly biased, than from people who try to say that they are reporting the news unbiasedly. At least I know the slant, and it makes it easier to dismiss the BS.
The point is, take the news you get with a grain of salt, no matter what your source is. Additionally, get your news from a variety of Points of View, as the truth usually lies (pun intended) in between.
The only idiots I know, get all their news from single sources. They don't listen to alternative views because they can't actually use their heads to filter the news. This goes to both lefties and righties.
I also suggest that if you're railing against "Faux News", that you also rail against the others that end up doing the same thing, manufacturing "news" and "facts".
[quote]Getting out of Iraq isn't change you're interested in? You'd rather stay in at least another 4 years and spend another couple thousand lives?[/quote]
You know, idiots like you think one thing makes the world, and are extremely shallow. You accept taking of rights for things you agree with, and not for others you don't. It is the same with (D) as it is with (R). No, getting out of Iraq isn't even going to address the increasing intrusions of government into the lives of people. If you think it is, then you're an idiot.
Real change is to give FREEDOM back to the people, and getting government interference out of our lives.
There is a whole long line of ever increasing government interference in our lives, half supported by (D) and half supported by (R). Cigarettes and Drugs, Motocycle Helmets and Universal Health Care. Hate "crimes" and Open Boarders. Ever increasing government is the problem, and both (D) and (R) are the culprits. There is no other groups to blame. Period.
In a way, Nader was 100% right, but not for the reason he believes. Gore Presidency would have produced a wacko environmental rules and regulation based upon bad information, misjudgenets and would result in the same bad economy we have today. And Gore is just as much a hypocrite as the (D)s think of Bush and Co, having used 10% more electricity since going "green". Not to mention his Oxi-Petrol oil deals.
The solution isn't more government, it is less, a lot less. And as for GWB's war mongering, at least he didn't bomb an aspirin factory and start a war in Bosnia to cover up a blowjob.
Actually, we did. It was over turned with a Constitutional Ammendment, which limited the total number of US Reps to the number we have today.
Originally it was one rep per 30,000 people. Currently the reps represent over 20 times that number. I'd wager that we had the number of reps needed to provide 30K to 1 representation we'd have more parties.
Additionally the Constitution provides that each State sets the rules for setting the Elector for President. The States have decided winner take all, but it doesn't have to be that way. Again, I can assure you that if we had 30K + 2 (senators) to 1 ratio, and states gave proportional or even by district electors, we'd have more parties.
But as it is, the parties (D) and (R) have joined together to limit this by the rules put into place by the legislatures of the various states.
It is this limitation which prevents third parties, and if I were to file a suit, would be the basis for my lawsuit; that the (D) and (R) parties have formed an illegal cartel to prevent third parties from succeeding.
The best and only way to fix this, is to kick out the (D) and (R) people from State Legislatures by voting third party people into office, or by ballot initiative to change the State Constitution / Laws regarding Electors for President.
Voting for the person/party that represents my views the best is never pointless. If you suggest that voting 3rd party is pointless because they'll never win, is much like saying developing Linux Kernal in 2001 when Linus released version was pointless because it couldn't compete with Windows or Mac.
It is only pointless, until it is not. Then it becomes something bigger than most imagined it could in the beginning.
Besides, if you want to keep voting for the same old same old two parties, and expect things to actually change, then you're insane.
People want real change this year, and neither Obama nor McCain offer it, not really. Both offer more of the same crap we've had since 88. I'm also a tad disillusioned by Barr winning the (L) ticket.
That being said, I can never vote for people willing to take from others for political expediency, or for whatever "greater/common good" they think is important.
This isn't really about "progressive" (left) or conservative (right) politics.
This is about freedom (liberty). Progressives tend to take from people when it is expedient, as does conservatives. Which is why people ought to vote libertarian where governmental taking is just plain frowned upon.
Not all useless wars use guns. There will always be "poor people" because "poor" is a relative term. When everyone has microwaves, tvs, food, education, stereos.... Then "poor" becomes those that can't buy a Wii.
By just about any standard out there, there are very little who "poor" in America. And many of those actually chose to be that, rather than get off their arses and work for something.
Mozilla Spokesmonkey "We would have set the record, but were over whelmed by the interest in Firefox 3, and the publicity to break a download record. We truly appriciate everyone interest.
I swear, the time I clicked that link my speed dropped so fast (Gig link) it wasn't funny. The original time was like 30 secs, ended up being 2-3 minutes by the time it finished.
I never thought we could slashdot Mozilla, but I think we did.
Or, you know, just abandon and eventually lose the source code. So what? You never had the code in the first place, and if you'd develop open code originally you wouldn't care in the second place.
The code isn't yours, so why should you care if if disappears, especially since you never had access to it in the first place?
Your whole whine is nothing short of exactly what I'm talking about originally. Typical of many who want to decide what others can and can't do.
I don't whine about closed source software. It is pointless to whine about it being closed, because it isn't my code. Freedom also means free to keep things closed, or else it is meaningless.
CmdrTaco wasn't whining that the source isn't available, but he seemed disappointed He was whining over his disappointment. Instead of being disappointed, he should have asked if there was anyone on/. who was working on it as OSS.
The "no source" comment is a whine. It means "I want the code for free", and "I'm too lazy or incompetent to code it myself".
If what he meant to say was "wow, this is a great idea, who's got open source version?" then that's what he should have said, as it is much less ambiguous and actually would promote Open Source Coding. Someone (or a few) versions might come to light and those that were interested could pool resources and actually get to work on improving what exists.
It is better to promote what IS open than it is whine about what isn't. The best way to win for OSS is for it to actually compete with better software.
If we, the OSS community, can out-compete those developing proprietary, they'll eventually release it Open Source without us even asking (whining) for it to be open, or at least know that they will be doomed eventually to a freer and more open version.
Slashdot Mirror
Fox news isn't doing anything different from NBC, CBS and ABC. Most notably, exploding trucks, and fake documents. And these are the cases where they got caught.
I'd rather get my news and opinions from people who are knowingly biased, than from people who try to say that they are reporting the news unbiasedly. At least I know the slant, and it makes it easier to dismiss the BS.
The point is, take the news you get with a grain of salt, no matter what your source is. Additionally, get your news from a variety of Points of View, as the truth usually lies (pun intended) in between.
The only idiots I know, get all their news from single sources. They don't listen to alternative views because they can't actually use their heads to filter the news. This goes to both lefties and righties.
I also suggest that if you're railing against "Faux News", that you also rail against the others that end up doing the same thing, manufacturing "news" and "facts".
Well, that's because Rupert is the Evil (tm) owner of Fox News (Faux for lefties), so anything that makes him look More Evil (TM)(C) is okay.
Duh!
[quote]Getting out of Iraq isn't change you're interested in? You'd rather stay in at least another 4 years and spend another couple thousand lives?[/quote]
You know, idiots like you think one thing makes the world, and are extremely shallow. You accept taking of rights for things you agree with, and not for others you don't. It is the same with (D) as it is with (R). No, getting out of Iraq isn't even going to address the increasing intrusions of government into the lives of people. If you think it is, then you're an idiot.
Real change is to give FREEDOM back to the people, and getting government interference out of our lives.
There is a whole long line of ever increasing government interference in our lives, half supported by (D) and half supported by (R). Cigarettes and Drugs, Motocycle Helmets and Universal Health Care. Hate "crimes" and Open Boarders. Ever increasing government is the problem, and both (D) and (R) are the culprits. There is no other groups to blame. Period.
In a way, Nader was 100% right, but not for the reason he believes. Gore Presidency would have produced a wacko environmental rules and regulation based upon bad information, misjudgenets and would result in the same bad economy we have today. And Gore is just as much a hypocrite as the (D)s think of Bush and Co, having used 10% more electricity since going "green". Not to mention his Oxi-Petrol oil deals.
The solution isn't more government, it is less, a lot less. And as for GWB's war mongering, at least he didn't bomb an aspirin factory and start a war in Bosnia to cover up a blowjob.
This is "Ranked" or "Rated" voting methods.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system#Ranked_voting_methods
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system#Rated_voting_methods
Probably too confusing for Florida voters.
Actually, we did. It was over turned with a Constitutional Ammendment, which limited the total number of US Reps to the number we have today.
Originally it was one rep per 30,000 people. Currently the reps represent over 20 times that number. I'd wager that we had the number of reps needed to provide 30K to 1 representation we'd have more parties.
Additionally the Constitution provides that each State sets the rules for setting the Elector for President. The States have decided winner take all, but it doesn't have to be that way. Again, I can assure you that if we had 30K + 2 (senators) to 1 ratio, and states gave proportional or even by district electors, we'd have more parties.
But as it is, the parties (D) and (R) have joined together to limit this by the rules put into place by the legislatures of the various states.
It is this limitation which prevents third parties, and if I were to file a suit, would be the basis for my lawsuit; that the (D) and (R) parties have formed an illegal cartel to prevent third parties from succeeding.
The best and only way to fix this, is to kick out the (D) and (R) people from State Legislatures by voting third party people into office, or by ballot initiative to change the State Constitution / Laws regarding Electors for President.
Voting for the person/party that represents my views the best is never pointless. If you suggest that voting 3rd party is pointless because they'll never win, is much like saying developing Linux Kernal in 2001 when Linus released version was pointless because it couldn't compete with Windows or Mac.
It is only pointless, until it is not. Then it becomes something bigger than most imagined it could in the beginning.
Besides, if you want to keep voting for the same old same old two parties, and expect things to actually change, then you're insane.
People want real change this year, and neither Obama nor McCain offer it, not really. Both offer more of the same crap we've had since 88. I'm also a tad disillusioned by Barr winning the (L) ticket.
That being said, I can never vote for people willing to take from others for political expediency, or for whatever "greater/common good" they think is important.
or does anyone else find the FISA article and the Subversion article being sequential a tad ironic?
This isn't really about "progressive" (left) or conservative (right) politics.
This is about freedom (liberty). Progressives tend to take from people when it is expedient, as does conservatives. Which is why people ought to vote libertarian where governmental taking is just plain frowned upon.
8.29 Million as of 11:16:59 PDT when it should have stopped counting.
At 10:39am PDT, the counter went over 8 Million.
Please add ...
.... Then "poor" becomes those that can't buy a Wii.
War on Poverty
Not all useless wars use guns. There will always be "poor people" because "poor" is a relative term. When everyone has microwaves, tvs, food, education, stereos
By just about any standard out there, there are very little who "poor" in America. And many of those actually chose to be that, rather than get off their arses and work for something.
We can't get any useful intelligence from Achmed, because he's dead
I can see the headlines on Mozilla tomorrow.
World record attempt fails miserably.
Mozilla Spokesmonkey "We would have set the record, but were over whelmed by the interest in Firefox 3, and the publicity to break a download record. We truly appriciate everyone interest.
We'll try again tomorrow"
Keep hitting that "refresh" button to try and get to the Download site. I'm pretty sure that will help out the slashdot effect!
... on windows?
I swear, the time I clicked that link my speed dropped so fast (Gig link) it wasn't funny. The original time was like 30 secs, ended up being 2-3 minutes by the time it finished.
I never thought we could slashdot Mozilla, but I think we did.
No, it was more of a I know I am, but so are you. Not the same thing. :-P
Lakers vs Celtics?
Blood vs Crips?
Basically it means your over sensitive to my over sensitivity. IMHO :-D
So your meta-meta-whining isn't pointless? ;-)
The code isn't yours, so why should you care if if disappears, especially since you never had access to it in the first place?
Your whole whine is nothing short of exactly what I'm talking about originally. Typical of many who want to decide what others can and can't do.
I don't whine about closed source software. It is pointless to whine about it being closed, because it isn't my code. Freedom also means free to keep things closed, or else it is meaningless.
One can say "its going to rain" three different ways.
1) indifference (non-caring weatherman - my brother)
2) with glee (my wife)
3) Whining (me)
If one knows the source of the comment, one can deduce the mood. Taco was whining, IMHO.
So, who's got something going ????
The "no source" comment is a whine. It means "I want the code for free", and "I'm too lazy or incompetent to code it myself".
If what he meant to say was "wow, this is a great idea, who's got open source version?" then that's what he should have said, as it is much less ambiguous and actually would promote Open Source Coding. Someone (or a few) versions might come to light and those that were interested could pool resources and actually get to work on improving what exists.
It is better to promote what IS open than it is whine about what isn't. The best way to win for OSS is for it to actually compete with better software.
If we, the OSS community, can out-compete those developing proprietary, they'll eventually release it Open Source without us even asking (whining) for it to be open, or at least know that they will be doomed eventually to a freer and more open version.