Oh Please yourself. When the Libertarians are rejected for "Somalia" and "dirty air and water", people like yourself cheer. Here is a REAL example of something government is likely to do, and you're "oh please", dismissing it.
Fact is, AirBNB is allowing people to make an extra buck on the side. The government can't figure out the difference between a person who is on AirBNB to make an extra buck or two, and one that is there to make a lot of money. Nor should it care. And that is the problem.
Socialists and Liberals have no idea about value in a scarce commodity. They artificially make scarce a commodity (real estate zoning / rent control) in a vain effort to force private people into their own will, only to have it backfire repeatedly. And the excuse for continuing the repeating the failed social experiments is... "This time, we'll get it right"
The government should not be creating artificial restrictions for social purposes. It doesn't work, makes things worse, and in the end, screws everyone.
Have you compared two EULAs? There is only about 50% that is reused between any two similar ones. TOS seems to be a tad more consistent, but that isn't saying much.
And personally, I wouldn't mind Boilerplate EULAs that I could read one, and know for certain that 95 % of the next one was the exact same. But they are not.
IMHO (which is biased) Pokemon has a limited lifespan, until people actually get bored doing the same old shit every day. There is almost nothing compelling about the game, and there is very little if any competition between the teams.
So, while it may be exciting now, because it is shiny and new, once the luster tarnishes, what is there to hold the attention of Dory the Fish?
I don't measure success by media attention. Lots of people are very successful without it. It is a horrible gauge. I didn't misread your comments, I read them fine. I completely read them, understood them, and explained why they weren't in my world view. When you give two examples, both "media darlings" whose claim to fame are SEX TAPES, then yeah, I can only draw one conclusion;-)
What, exactly, would a "Reasonable Person" believe is in a non-standardized EULA / TOS agreement ? I mean, of the entire class of EULA / TOS style agreements, how many "reasonable persons" have actually ready one, let alone the one they are about to agree to?
IMHO the whole "reasonable person" thing is grounds for tossing them completely out of court, since by very nature, reading the TOS / EULA itself is unreasonable.
If "Fame" is your only measure of success, then I guess "luck" has everything to do with it.
Why didn't you mention Nikki Hilton? Because she isn't famous (media)
And Kim Kardashian is famous for two things, sex video, and being the daughter of the attorney for OJ Simpson. Everything she's done since then is milked the opportunity she was given. And why didn't you mention Kloe? Because she isn't nearly as famous (media)
Linus was in the right place, with the right tools, with the right attitude with the right licensing to make Linux work. Linux WOULD have been invented otherwise, and it might not have been as successful, but for Linus and his abrasive personality driving to make Linux better.
I don't dismiss luck. Was Holly Holm Lucky when she knocked Rhonda out? OR was it hard work and opportunity ? Or are those the same thing?
If you mean ignoring all the evidence against her, simply because the corrupt Justice Department didn't actually indict her for breaking the law. Here is the "no evidence" you're asking for...
As a personal note, I've seen my share of "opportunities" in which I was not prepared. I've even seen some opportunities where I was prepared, but went to someone who wasn't prepared, because they had a better "personality" than I did, and those opportunities died.
I dare say, that most people miss opportunities they are presented with, even if they are "prepared" for them because of some other reason (gumption, ethics, lack of ass kissing etc). I've seen "average" people, who work harder than "talented" ones, do better with less talent, simply because they work harder.
There are a lot of circumstances to success, and putting everything together doesn't ensure success. People call that "luck". I call it.. not everyone can be a rock star. Is it fair? Life itself isn't fair. Call it luck.;)
Both are 100% unqualified. Not sure how you get beyond 100% unqualified. But go ahead, and justify all you want. You're the reason we have Trump and Hillary in the first place.
Actually, I rather doubt the "people" want Clinton. Democrats barely want her, and everyone else is pretty much given that she is a total and complete crook. Enough Democrats will hold their noses and vote for her, that she will likely win. There are very few people who actually "want" her, but that is all they have for the D. The fact that Trump, who has negatives almost equal to Hillary won the GOP sweepstakes is also very interesting, especially when you look at Bernie's campaign successes.
The fact that Bernie called Clinton "unqualified" throughout his campaign, and is now supporting her is a testament to the Party politics that both D and R people have expressed in the election this year. That alone helps two people, Trump (outsider) and Gary Johnson, the Libertarian.
My guess is, when push comes to shove, nobody gets close to 50 % of the popular vote. If Gary Johnson gets closer to 20%, there will be a HUGE uproar as neither Trump or Clinton will get 40%. My biggest hope is that Johnson gets very close to 30%, and wrecks the idea that the president (Clinton / Trump) has any sort of mandate to do anything.
I'm not sure what is more horrifying, that the AG said she broke criminal statutes and lied to the American People repeatedly, or that she was too incompetent to be Secretary of State.
Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
You go back 3500 years ago to get that? Wow, that is IMPRESSIVE! Never mind the nearly 2000 years where Israel didn't exist due to attempted Genocide of the Jewish people, and the whole WWII thing that caused the world to give Israel a small piece of land surrounded by Peaceful Muslims (who promptly invaded).
Yeah, ignoring anything between 3500 years ago, and now is PERFECTLY acceptable.
And if you're white, you exterminated the peaceful Neanderthals, you piece of shit.
Perhaps people should be more careful about the accusations they make.
Why?
Accusations are often all that is needed in this world to create the effect you desire. Accusations work, because people think that an accusation = "Guilty" or at least "suspicious" and that is all that is needed to trigger the "fear" response. It works, because most people don't actually THINK, don't want to think, they only care about Kardashians or Taylor Swift.
Seriously, WE (us people) should require people making accusations to start putting up or shutting up. Guilty until proven innocent sucks.
No, I am not assuming "get rid of Facebook" is immoral. Using questionable tactics to do so is immoral. In this case suing them for whatever "Terrorism" plot was hatched on it. Just wait until voting for "Unacceptable candidate" of your choice is deemed "Terrorism" by the powers that be. Or whatever tool they used (Zello, Slack, Google Docs, Google+....) that you like is also sued for the exact same reason.
No, the problem I have isn't Facebook, it is that two wrongs don't make it right, EVEN IF the result IS what you want, in this particular case. Because at some point down the road, you're gonna run into someone doing the same thing to something you DO like.
No, Facebook hasn't contributed to terrorism, any more than Samsung/Apple/Windows phones have.
Typical propaganda and typical Anti-Semetic bullshit. The actual charter for Hamas calls for actual "Genocide". You know, the "peaceful muslims".
I want to know what "crap" is going on in West Bank, other than Israel Pull out and Hamas promptly started violence towards Israel.
And as for support for Palestine, fine, and dandy, but you should know, that they are REALLY not very nice to all kinds of people, who aren't just like them. People like women, gays, christians, jews.... just about everyone who isn't a murdering Muslim Terrorist (who are hailed as heroes). So, yeah, please keep on NOT supporting the only democracy in the middle east, one that even has... Palestinian members.
Saying I am "upset" isn't quite right. I find it "amusing" that something that is so "new" isn't really all that "new".
They should have used different places for their Pokestops, which are based on Ingress (and backstory) Portals. Create your own backstory, and own locations. Oh wait, that would be... re-inventing the wheel! (not that new, after all)
And yes, Pokemon is going to be all the rage, until all the idiots come out and get themselves hurt and killed. It happens in Ingress, but the PokeKids are pretty damn stupid about slamming on their brakes in front of the nearest pokestop doing whatever they do there.
"Brand Recognition" was left blank. Ingress was a New Game, by a New Company with New Mechanics. The whole thing was "new". Pokemon, while having "brand" recognition, is largely dependent upon Ingress for much of its game play (Gyms, Stops etc). Which is pathetic for a franchise to be dependent on something that has none. When I first saw that, I thought "Lame" .
Slashdot Mirror
Oh Please yourself. When the Libertarians are rejected for "Somalia" and "dirty air and water", people like yourself cheer. Here is a REAL example of something government is likely to do, and you're "oh please", dismissing it.
Fact is, AirBNB is allowing people to make an extra buck on the side. The government can't figure out the difference between a person who is on AirBNB to make an extra buck or two, and one that is there to make a lot of money. Nor should it care. And that is the problem.
Socialists and Liberals have no idea about value in a scarce commodity. They artificially make scarce a commodity (real estate zoning / rent control) in a vain effort to force private people into their own will, only to have it backfire repeatedly. And the excuse for continuing the repeating the failed social experiments is ... "This time, we'll get it right"
The government should not be creating artificial restrictions for social purposes. It doesn't work, makes things worse, and in the end, screws everyone.
Have you compared two EULAs? There is only about 50% that is reused between any two similar ones. TOS seems to be a tad more consistent, but that isn't saying much.
And personally, I wouldn't mind Boilerplate EULAs that I could read one, and know for certain that 95 % of the next one was the exact same. But they are not.
IMHO (which is biased) Pokemon has a limited lifespan, until people actually get bored doing the same old shit every day. There is almost nothing compelling about the game, and there is very little if any competition between the teams.
So, while it may be exciting now, because it is shiny and new, once the luster tarnishes, what is there to hold the attention of Dory the Fish?
I don't measure success by media attention. Lots of people are very successful without it. It is a horrible gauge. I didn't misread your comments, I read them fine. I completely read them, understood them, and explained why they weren't in my world view. When you give two examples, both "media darlings" whose claim to fame are SEX TAPES, then yeah, I can only draw one conclusion ;-)
What, exactly, would a "Reasonable Person" believe is in a non-standardized EULA / TOS agreement ? I mean, of the entire class of EULA / TOS style agreements, how many "reasonable persons" have actually ready one, let alone the one they are about to agree to?
IMHO the whole "reasonable person" thing is grounds for tossing them completely out of court, since by very nature, reading the TOS / EULA itself is unreasonable.
If "Fame" is your only measure of success, then I guess "luck" has everything to do with it.
Why didn't you mention Nikki Hilton? Because she isn't famous (media)
And Kim Kardashian is famous for two things, sex video, and being the daughter of the attorney for OJ Simpson. Everything she's done since then is milked the opportunity she was given. And why didn't you mention Kloe? Because she isn't nearly as famous (media)
Linus was in the right place, with the right tools, with the right attitude with the right licensing to make Linux work. Linux WOULD have been invented otherwise, and it might not have been as successful, but for Linus and his abrasive personality driving to make Linux better.
I don't dismiss luck. Was Holly Holm Lucky when she knocked Rhonda out? OR was it hard work and opportunity ? Or are those the same thing?
single shred of evidence
If you mean ignoring all the evidence against her, simply because the corrupt Justice Department didn't actually indict her for breaking the law. Here is the "no evidence" you're asking for ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
As a personal note, I've seen my share of "opportunities" in which I was not prepared. I've even seen some opportunities where I was prepared, but went to someone who wasn't prepared, because they had a better "personality" than I did, and those opportunities died.
I dare say, that most people miss opportunities they are presented with, even if they are "prepared" for them because of some other reason (gumption, ethics, lack of ass kissing etc). I've seen "average" people, who work harder than "talented" ones, do better with less talent, simply because they work harder.
There are a lot of circumstances to success, and putting everything together doesn't ensure success. People call that "luck". I call it .. not everyone can be a rock star. Is it fair? Life itself isn't fair. Call it luck. ;)
“Luck Is What Happens When Preparation Meets Opportunity" - Seneca
If you're not prepared for opportunity, and someone else is, you call them "lucky". Probably because you were too busy with Pokemon Go!
What, like Obama's Nuclear Bomb deal with Iran? Its all political theater
Both are 100% unqualified. Not sure how you get beyond 100% unqualified. But go ahead, and justify all you want. You're the reason we have Trump and Hillary in the first place.
Vote Gary Johnson.
Otherwise you're voting for "Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice."
You mean towards tyranny and bigger government? Sorry, we already have that in the R and D candidates.
Actually, I rather doubt the "people" want Clinton. Democrats barely want her, and everyone else is pretty much given that she is a total and complete crook. Enough Democrats will hold their noses and vote for her, that she will likely win. There are very few people who actually "want" her, but that is all they have for the D. The fact that Trump, who has negatives almost equal to Hillary won the GOP sweepstakes is also very interesting, especially when you look at Bernie's campaign successes.
The fact that Bernie called Clinton "unqualified" throughout his campaign, and is now supporting her is a testament to the Party politics that both D and R people have expressed in the election this year. That alone helps two people, Trump (outsider) and Gary Johnson, the Libertarian.
My guess is, when push comes to shove, nobody gets close to 50 % of the popular vote. If Gary Johnson gets closer to 20%, there will be a HUGE uproar as neither Trump or Clinton will get 40%. My biggest hope is that Johnson gets very close to 30%, and wrecks the idea that the president (Clinton / Trump) has any sort of mandate to do anything.
I'm not sure what is more horrifying, that the AG said she broke criminal statutes and lied to the American People repeatedly, or that she was too incompetent to be Secretary of State.
Any sufficient level of incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.
You go back 3500 years ago to get that? Wow, that is IMPRESSIVE! Never mind the nearly 2000 years where Israel didn't exist due to attempted Genocide of the Jewish people, and the whole WWII thing that caused the world to give Israel a small piece of land surrounded by Peaceful Muslims (who promptly invaded).
Yeah, ignoring anything between 3500 years ago, and now is PERFECTLY acceptable.
And if you're white, you exterminated the peaceful Neanderthals, you piece of shit.
Lighten up Francis.
You poor Snowflake
Perhaps people should be more careful about the accusations they make.
Why?
Accusations are often all that is needed in this world to create the effect you desire. Accusations work, because people think that an accusation = "Guilty" or at least "suspicious" and that is all that is needed to trigger the "fear" response. It works, because most people don't actually THINK, don't want to think, they only care about Kardashians or Taylor Swift.
Seriously, WE (us people) should require people making accusations to start putting up or shutting up. Guilty until proven innocent sucks.
No, I am not assuming "get rid of Facebook" is immoral. Using questionable tactics to do so is immoral. In this case suing them for whatever "Terrorism" plot was hatched on it. Just wait until voting for "Unacceptable candidate" of your choice is deemed "Terrorism" by the powers that be. Or whatever tool they used (Zello, Slack, Google Docs, Google+ ....) that you like is also sued for the exact same reason.
No, the problem I have isn't Facebook, it is that two wrongs don't make it right, EVEN IF the result IS what you want, in this particular case. Because at some point down the road, you're gonna run into someone doing the same thing to something you DO like.
No, Facebook hasn't contributed to terrorism, any more than Samsung/Apple/Windows phones have.
These attorneys should be ashamed of themselves.
Have you met any attorneys? The whole profession is built around lack of shame.
Ahh yes, the "two wrongs make a right" as long as one of the "wrongs" is in your favor argument.
Legal doesn't make it moral.
and/or genocide
Typical propaganda and typical Anti-Semetic bullshit. The actual charter for Hamas calls for actual "Genocide". You know, the "peaceful muslims".
I want to know what "crap" is going on in West Bank, other than Israel Pull out and Hamas promptly started violence towards Israel.
And as for support for Palestine, fine, and dandy, but you should know, that they are REALLY not very nice to all kinds of people, who aren't just like them. People like women, gays, christians, jews .... just about everyone who isn't a murdering Muslim Terrorist (who are hailed as heroes). So, yeah, please keep on NOT supporting the only democracy in the middle east, one that even has ... Palestinian members.
I will NEVER understand why any Jew is a liberal.
Saying I am "upset" isn't quite right. I find it "amusing" that something that is so "new" isn't really all that "new".
They should have used different places for their Pokestops, which are based on Ingress (and backstory) Portals. Create your own backstory, and own locations. Oh wait, that would be ... re-inventing the wheel! (not that new, after all)
And yes, Pokemon is going to be all the rage, until all the idiots come out and get themselves hurt and killed. It happens in Ingress, but the PokeKids are pretty damn stupid about slamming on their brakes in front of the nearest pokestop doing whatever they do there.
"Brand Recognition" was left blank. Ingress was a New Game, by a New Company with New Mechanics. The whole thing was "new". Pokemon, while having "brand" recognition, is largely dependent upon Ingress for much of its game play (Gyms, Stops etc). Which is pathetic for a franchise to be dependent on something that has none. When I first saw that, I thought "Lame" .