OMG, dude, do yourself the favor. (It's Radiohead, by the way.) Radiohead is in my top three favorites, and most fans have them at number one. Their album Kid A is my favorite album of all time -- er, maybe second favorite. Try Kid A and Amnesiac to start. If you think those are the best albums ever, you are with me; if you think they are too experimental, then go back and try their earlier albums, OK Computer and Pablo Honey, which played to a wider audience (but weren't as capital-G Good).
Also, they did have a couple big radio hits. You have probably heard Karma Police, which is a decent hit, but far from their best song.
what's happening in an iPod or Zune or something like that when you turn it on? I imagine these days it's a trimmed-down, fast-booting OS that doesn't take time to load and start all the stuff it doesn't use
Yeah, except for the "fast" party. My iPod "boots" in, shit, almost a whole minute. That's not fast at all. Furthermore, PowerBooks in 2001 would wake from sleep in under one second; today my MacBook Pro takes five or ten seconds. What the heck is that about? Is the MacBook ten times slower than an old PowerBook? They claim it's way faster, but that hasn't been my experience. Truthfully, I think the speed of computers has been a gigantic letdown this decade.
Because (at the risk of being accused of Trolling), Apple will eventually bring out iRightNow which will pretty much do the same thing but in White only and at three times the price?
Close, but not quite. It won't be called iRightNow, it will have a stupid French name. Also, you didn't mention that unlike the competition, Apple's implementation will be useful.
Huh? My computer doesn't have any trouble at all understanding base-10 numbers. Computers can translate between bases with trivial effort. I don't think we need to choose our human counting methods according to how easy it is for the computers. Trust me, the computers can keep up.
The SI folks wisely realized that moving time to a base 10 unit was not practical because the natural division of days into years could never be forced into base-10 units comfortably. Instead, they acknowledge the usefulness of these non-SI units as acceptable for use in spite of their non-base-10 nature.
I totally agree! Now when can we please have reasonable measures of small quantities of volume, based on a unit approximately the size of two cupped hands? That's a human-understandable unit. Since it's based on cupped hands, we'll call it a "cup".
I wouldn't buy Office at any price (I never need it, so it is worth zero) but I would pay a reasonable price for Windows. Say... three or four dollars. Five seems a little steep.
The age of the earth is one point of dogmatic faith, based loosely on the Bible's given timeline (the familial lines, mostly). That timeline is somewhat vague, but certainly gives a creation moment thousands of years ago, not billions of years ago.
Obviously, not all Bible believers believe the earth is only 6000 years old, but some of them do, so it's a funny way to poke fun at the craziness of the whole lot. It's synecdoche.
The Bible does say, however, in very certain terms, that a circle's circumference is precisely three times its diameter. That's the most direct violation of reality I can cite, if you gloss over the miracles.
Bush lying about an illegal war and causing the deaths of thousands of American citizens and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian deaths? Yeah, he should be drawn and quartered for that...
Ha! Yes, torturing Bush would be a satisfying irony. Sadly, even for Bush, I still wouldn't condone torture. Your statement is perfectly true, though: he lied, the war was illegal, and he caused huge numbers of deaths needlessly. He is doubtlessly the worst President in our history, edging out both Nixon and McKinley.
The Clinton impeachment was a gigantic clusterfuck, a massive political ploy, and underpinned by unadulterated bullshit. Still, he lied, so he should have been convicted and removed. 100% perfect honesty is the level of conduct I demand from my elected representatives. Nowadays I like the work he's doing, but I don't hold ex-Presidents to the same high standard I hold Presidents to.
Boucher was also one of the most vocal opponents of Clinton's impeachment, and has also been on record criticizing the excesses DMCA as well.
Well, hey, 50% ain't so bad, all things considered. Strange such a great right-minded congressman would oppose the removal of a President who deliberately and directly lied to the American people. Does he also oppose a Bush removal? I support/supported both removals, for the same reason: if you are President, you can't lie to me, ever, for any reason. You may, if necessary, tell me you can't answer (national security, cf. Bush) or that the question is stupid and you refuse to answer (personal life, cf. Clinton); but you may not choose to answer the question with a baldfaced lie. So I think it's sad that Boucher doesn't see it that way.
All I can do is cancel the service, and hope others do too.
That's the most likely thing to do, and a very appropriate consumer-level response. If all consumers would take that simple step, then we would even need alternative measures. But since most people are willing to shut up and deal with crappy service and marketing lies, we do have other possible reprisals. For you, you might consider a lawsuit, especially one in small claims court, where (if I understand correctly) you would argue with a regular human instead of a lawyer. Sue for the maximum allowed in small claims court and see what happens.
Or, screw it, just cancel the service and fire off a nasty letter to the company. Also, post to online forums for Comcast service, hopefully convincing other people never to become customers in the first place.
yeah i think so too. but a constitution is only as strong as the will to enforce it. we don't have the will to enforce the unconstitutionality of lots and lots of things, the first of which was the federal bank, after that all of the New Deal, and now all sorts of wiretapping bullshit. (one good way to deal with the unconstitutionality of the federal bank and the New Deal would be to modify the constitution to allow those things. for the wiretapping, an impeachment might be the best route.) a constitution isn't so much the paper document as the enduring belief of the population. in this case, you and i like the paper document's ideals more than our neighbors' ideals.
this amounts to a theoretical discussion of What Is Law. some people will point to a paper document with words on it and an action by a legislature which approved those words. they will say that is the Law. but really it's not, The Law really is the effective law, which is to say, The Law is tantamount to the enforcement of the law. is an unenforced or unenforcable law part of The Law? depends on who you ask. i say no. is an unwritten but enforced law part of The Law? (example: common law)? i say yes; maybe you say no. so then, if no one is willing to stop the war on drugs just because the war on drugs is unconstitutional, then is it really unconstitutional? it's unclear.
thank you. i appreciate the correction, because normally i'm the grammar nazi, and i hate to be wrong on that stuff. i used Affect because that's usually the verb, but you're right, in this case Effect is the appropriate rarely used verb.
no i didn't, but good try. my original post said i support both legalization and democracy, but democracy more than legalization. a false dilemma supposes i could have only one or the other, but that's not at all what i want, i want the third option -- both. but, again, if forced to choose, i choose democracy.
better than the fourth amendment, the second. well, no not really, i guess that's my point about supporting democracy. better the fourth than the second. but, if needed, the second.
No, no. I don't think it's "okay", and I don't think it's "okay" to put people in jail for smoking a harmless plant which brings joy and wonder. If I balance my support for legalization against my support for democracy, democracy wins handily. When I balance my support for universal rights against my support for democracy, it's much closer, but democracy still wins. I would ask myself, is it better to live in 1700s Mississippi as a free man, or in 1900s USSR as a communist subject? I'd go with the former. Slaves don't count in the thought experiment because they didn't get democracy in either case.
Discrimination against women is a broad term (excuse the pun) but if you mean outright subjugation, then I would say that's a fraction less offensive than slavery, so I'd still go with democracy if that were the question.
So, if I lived in a democracy that allowed slavery or discrimination against women or marijuana prohibition, I would work inside the democracy to affect change, instead of working outside the democracy, for instance by overthrowing the government and installing myself as unelected leader.
Luckily our society has already addressed universal personal rights and universal democratic suffrage. Now we can quibble about the little things, like abortion, drugs, immigration, and taxes.
PS the logical fallacy your employed in your unsuccessful attempt to undermine my message is a 'straw man attack'; but you likely already knew that.
From what I understand of what you're saying, we both agree very much. Unfortunately, we are in the minority in a democracy. That sucks for us.
The only thing I'd like to point out is that plenty of nonviolent criminals belong in jail. Thieves come to mind. Being nonviolent shouldn't keep you out of jail, just like enjoying a doob shouldn't land you in the clink.
Slashdot Mirror
I have never heard anything by RadioHead
OMG, dude, do yourself the favor. (It's Radiohead, by the way.) Radiohead is in my top three favorites, and most fans have them at number one. Their album Kid A is my favorite album of all time -- er, maybe second favorite. Try Kid A and Amnesiac to start. If you think those are the best albums ever, you are with me; if you think they are too experimental, then go back and try their earlier albums, OK Computer and Pablo Honey, which played to a wider audience (but weren't as capital-G Good).
Also, they did have a couple big radio hits. You have probably heard Karma Police, which is a decent hit, but far from their best song.
I'm a bad fan; I haven't heard Rainbows yet.
I look dread the new crop of programmers and 'engineers' being 'output' by the educational system.
Yes, and the English majors being 'output' by the education system look dread you.
what's happening in an iPod or Zune or something like that when you turn it on? I imagine these days it's a trimmed-down, fast-booting OS that doesn't take time to load and start all the stuff it doesn't use
Yeah, except for the "fast" party. My iPod "boots" in, shit, almost a whole minute. That's not fast at all. Furthermore, PowerBooks in 2001 would wake from sleep in under one second; today my MacBook Pro takes five or ten seconds. What the heck is that about? Is the MacBook ten times slower than an old PowerBook? They claim it's way faster, but that hasn't been my experience. Truthfully, I think the speed of computers has been a gigantic letdown this decade.
close case to open case
What does this mean?
Because (at the risk of being accused of Trolling), Apple will eventually bring out iRightNow which will pretty much do the same thing but in White only and at three times the price?
Close, but not quite. It won't be called iRightNow, it will have a stupid French name. Also, you didn't mention that unlike the competition, Apple's implementation will be useful.
excellent point.
cf. 18 year olds with 17 year old girlfriends/boyfriends; and marijuana smokers
lightweight. come stateside and we'll show you how to drink a gallon.
PS i like liters better than gallons. gallons are too big. but kilograms aren't better than pounds, and meters are far worse than feet or inches.
Dude, you just blew my mind, seriously. I never thought of that before.
Huh? My computer doesn't have any trouble at all understanding base-10 numbers. Computers can translate between bases with trivial effort. I don't think we need to choose our human counting methods according to how easy it is for the computers. Trust me, the computers can keep up.
The SI folks wisely realized that moving time to a base 10 unit was not practical because the natural division of days into years could never be forced into base-10 units comfortably. Instead, they acknowledge the usefulness of these non-SI units as acceptable for use in spite of their non-base-10 nature.
I totally agree! Now when can we please have reasonable measures of small quantities of volume, based on a unit approximately the size of two cupped hands? That's a human-understandable unit. Since it's based on cupped hands, we'll call it a "cup".
Who around here would notice if sex was taxed?
Not me, although I would certainly notice if sex were taxed.
I wouldn't buy Office at any price (I never need it, so it is worth zero) but I would pay a reasonable price for Windows. Say... three or four dollars. Five seems a little steep.
Nationally. International standards are important, but not for inflation.
The age of the earth is one point of dogmatic faith, based loosely on the Bible's given timeline (the familial lines, mostly). That timeline is somewhat vague, but certainly gives a creation moment thousands of years ago, not billions of years ago.
Obviously, not all Bible believers believe the earth is only 6000 years old, but some of them do, so it's a funny way to poke fun at the craziness of the whole lot. It's synecdoche.
The Bible does say, however, in very certain terms, that a circle's circumference is precisely three times its diameter. That's the most direct violation of reality I can cite, if you gloss over the miracles.
Bush lying about an illegal war and causing the deaths of thousands of American citizens and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilian deaths? Yeah, he should be drawn and quartered for that...
Ha! Yes, torturing Bush would be a satisfying irony. Sadly, even for Bush, I still wouldn't condone torture. Your statement is perfectly true, though: he lied, the war was illegal, and he caused huge numbers of deaths needlessly. He is doubtlessly the worst President in our history, edging out both Nixon and McKinley.
The Clinton impeachment was a gigantic clusterfuck, a massive political ploy, and underpinned by unadulterated bullshit. Still, he lied, so he should have been convicted and removed. 100% perfect honesty is the level of conduct I demand from my elected representatives. Nowadays I like the work he's doing, but I don't hold ex-Presidents to the same high standard I hold Presidents to.
Boucher was also one of the most vocal opponents of Clinton's impeachment, and has also been on record criticizing the excesses DMCA as well.
Well, hey, 50% ain't so bad, all things considered. Strange such a great right-minded congressman would oppose the removal of a President who deliberately and directly lied to the American people. Does he also oppose a Bush removal? I support/supported both removals, for the same reason: if you are President, you can't lie to me, ever, for any reason. You may, if necessary, tell me you can't answer (national security, cf. Bush) or that the question is stupid and you refuse to answer (personal life, cf. Clinton); but you may not choose to answer the question with a baldfaced lie. So I think it's sad that Boucher doesn't see it that way.
All I can do is cancel the service, and hope others do too.
That's the most likely thing to do, and a very appropriate consumer-level response. If all consumers would take that simple step, then we would even need alternative measures. But since most people are willing to shut up and deal with crappy service and marketing lies, we do have other possible reprisals. For you, you might consider a lawsuit, especially one in small claims court, where (if I understand correctly) you would argue with a regular human instead of a lawyer. Sue for the maximum allowed in small claims court and see what happens.
Or, screw it, just cancel the service and fire off a nasty letter to the company. Also, post to online forums for Comcast service, hopefully convincing other people never to become customers in the first place.
yeah i think so too. but a constitution is only as strong as the will to enforce it. we don't have the will to enforce the unconstitutionality of lots and lots of things, the first of which was the federal bank, after that all of the New Deal, and now all sorts of wiretapping bullshit. (one good way to deal with the unconstitutionality of the federal bank and the New Deal would be to modify the constitution to allow those things. for the wiretapping, an impeachment might be the best route.) a constitution isn't so much the paper document as the enduring belief of the population. in this case, you and i like the paper document's ideals more than our neighbors' ideals.
this amounts to a theoretical discussion of What Is Law. some people will point to a paper document with words on it and an action by a legislature which approved those words. they will say that is the Law. but really it's not, The Law really is the effective law, which is to say, The Law is tantamount to the enforcement of the law. is an unenforced or unenforcable law part of The Law? depends on who you ask. i say no. is an unwritten but enforced law part of The Law? (example: common law)? i say yes; maybe you say no. so then, if no one is willing to stop the war on drugs just because the war on drugs is unconstitutional, then is it really unconstitutional? it's unclear.
I accept your apology.
I agree. I wish the Supreme Court did, too. OR Congress. OR the Executive.
thank you. i appreciate the correction, because normally i'm the grammar nazi, and i hate to be wrong on that stuff. i used Affect because that's usually the verb, but you're right, in this case Effect is the appropriate rarely used verb.
no i didn't, but good try. my original post said i support both legalization and democracy, but democracy more than legalization. a false dilemma supposes i could have only one or the other, but that's not at all what i want, i want the third option -- both. but, again, if forced to choose, i choose democracy.
PS it depends on the crime and the jurisdiction.
better than the fourth amendment, the second. well, no not really, i guess that's my point about supporting democracy. better the fourth than the second. but, if needed, the second.
No, no. I don't think it's "okay", and I don't think it's "okay" to put people in jail for smoking a harmless plant which brings joy and wonder. If I balance my support for legalization against my support for democracy, democracy wins handily. When I balance my support for universal rights against my support for democracy, it's much closer, but democracy still wins. I would ask myself, is it better to live in 1700s Mississippi as a free man, or in 1900s USSR as a communist subject? I'd go with the former. Slaves don't count in the thought experiment because they didn't get democracy in either case.
Discrimination against women is a broad term (excuse the pun) but if you mean outright subjugation, then I would say that's a fraction less offensive than slavery, so I'd still go with democracy if that were the question.
So, if I lived in a democracy that allowed slavery or discrimination against women or marijuana prohibition, I would work inside the democracy to affect change, instead of working outside the democracy, for instance by overthrowing the government and installing myself as unelected leader.
Luckily our society has already addressed universal personal rights and universal democratic suffrage. Now we can quibble about the little things, like abortion, drugs, immigration, and taxes.
PS the logical fallacy your employed in your unsuccessful attempt to undermine my message is a 'straw man attack'; but you likely already knew that.
From what I understand of what you're saying, we both agree very much. Unfortunately, we are in the minority in a democracy. That sucks for us.
The only thing I'd like to point out is that plenty of nonviolent criminals belong in jail. Thieves come to mind. Being nonviolent shouldn't keep you out of jail, just like enjoying a doob shouldn't land you in the clink.