Because bad voting decisions don't lead people to die instantly.
It's not like I could go out and vote and next thing you know a someone died because of my vote.
Would your logic not suggest that people who voted for george w bush have blood on their hands because of Katrina and Iraq? Do Obama voters have blood on their hands because of drone strikes?
If I'm in a car and "Steer and floor it" as someone else suggests, there's a huge chance I could maim myself, possibly kill myself I'm unlucky, even with a seatbelt.
Cars are rarely advertised with their power to stop other human beings from being mobile, or even possibly living.
I can fire a bunch of bullets and kill a lot of people. In that same amount of time in a car I'm just shifting into first.
I should've been way more verbose about what I believe in. But honestly, I saw the headline and I blew my goddamned stack, and I should've been way more clear here because I think it's really fucking ridiculous.
No, I don't believe the average gun owner is a raging gun fondling nut bar. In fact, the evidence shows way otherwise.
And they are armed. And they have funny ideas about what freedom means. And they are also paranoid! Oh and they're pandered to by a major political party.
None of this is disconnected from reality, although I did say that rape threats were involved when in fact, it was really just general harassment and death threats. Sorry, I'm just so used to rape threats being part of the rage-o-sphere's response(MRA/MRMs, gun nuts, Philly's fans) to well, everything.
Still, I didn't mean to necessarily lump everyone who owns or likes guns in with the Cliven Bundy crowd but the fact of the matter is is that the Cliven Bundy crowd are more likely to harass and threaten someone like Belinda Padilla than the average gun enthusiast.
One major caveat. I think I mixed up the process COMPLETELY. I believe that's backwards. Ban people who have been shown to be incapable of owning firearms, not TEST.
Still, mainstream gun owners support proposed mainstream gun legislation. It's the far fringe whack jobs who are in opposition.
This is a bizarre argument that is extra-constitutional.
The exact text of the 2nd amendment is,
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed
What's funny is that the constitution has some pretty clear rules about what to do in cases of insurrection and treason.
Hint: The event that lead to the drafting of the constitution WAS insurrection against the US Government that was founded under the Articles of Confederation.
The idea that a person might have to be shown to be mentally competent and capable of owning and being responsible for a firearm isn't radical. It isn't even controversial outside of the gun nut circles. Even among mainstream GUN OWNERS, it's non-controversial.
Yet, it's these damned gun fetishists who are driving the gun policy and gun debate in this country. That's the problem. It's not the vast majority of people who own guns and are responsible, it's this lopsided minority that are willing to take up arms against federal officers to protect a guy who's freeloading off of federal lands or people who are extremely armed and vocal about their guns.
The rape threats, the murder threats, the wildly violent language...
if gun fondlers want to be thought of as reasonable people, then a lot of the people who took to the internet to harass and terrorize gun violence victims and those who are peddling smart gun tech need to be culled from the herd.
If you could point and click a car at random people and start maiming or killing them with no risk to the user, aside from someone retaliating, then sure.
There are still a lot of people writing shrink-wrapped software.
That also doesn't negate "consumer grade software development would still be for academics and hobbyists" argument either.
You're insane if you think that absolute Free as in Freedom distribution of software is a good idea. Granted, it's the unreasonable people who make change in the world, but at some point you've got to be realistic.
The post I was replying to was swinging towards the Libertarian side of things with no care for the nuance of why in some markets, the barrier to entry is really high if not impossible to break into.
With most markets, they are exclusive rights areas.
But, yes, your local municipality is also doing it right.
Without commercial software, a lot of programmers would go hungry.
It stinks, but, the hard reality is that with out some direct way to get compensated for work, consumer grade software development would still be for academics and hobbyists. While this kind of work has given us GNU and Linux, it wouldn't give us things like Android or Quake.
Distributing source freely is a sucker's bet. Being able to compile an app from easily redistributable source?
Insane. I'd love to see someone try to run their business this way.
Well, it's a Government monopoly with no oversight.
Because practically speaking, you can't just let any yahoo with a garden trowel and some fiberoptic cables just start digging around everywhere, it's a freaking nightmare to do that.
If we had real oversight on telcos and cable cos, enforced fair sharing of infrastructure and had state and local Governments enforce rules that make sense... Then really, the problem goes away. Even better if the local municipalities installed the fiber and leased it out to the local markets, or treated it like a utility.
Again, practically speaking, a lot of rural and suburban markets would still be underserved, but, it wouldn't be so heavily one sided nor would the barrier to entry be so high.
it's a joke. predicated on the fact that at launch, Skyrim had a quite a few problems.
Besides, no matter how clean or nice your machine was, the only people to blame for a bunch of the bugs, like the "horse can walk directly up mountains" glitch, were ZeniMax/Bethesda.
Even though it's long patched and fixed, the joke is just going to keep going around and around until a computer powerful enough to play Crysis can come around and stop this.
Studios still needed a way to replay VHS tapes from a variety of sources, such as mailed in VHS tapes from regular people. Production was done in a format that's derived from Beta, but not quite beta.
Way to trivialise. It's just one of the nastier example in a long pattern of behaviour from before that incident up to the present day. As usual, they only apologized for getting caught. Make no mistake, it's not the one incident that makes people hate Sony.
Were you even around/. during that time? Before the Geohot incident, before the removal of OtherOS, etc?
(BTW, going after geohot was justified. He leaked their goddamned root keys and taunted Sony.)
Wait what? Microsoft is off the hook for its evils now? Have you even read slashdot?
...said by someone who's UID is over 3 times mine.
No, seriously. The way people talk about Windows 7 around here you'd think it came with free hand jobs and cheetos on install.
i was talking about pharmaceuticals. The war on drugs is horse shit, although I think that keeping some drugs like meth and crack if not illegal, then somehow regulated, is generally a good idea. These are not kind drugs.
Slashdot Mirror
Because bad voting decisions don't lead people to die instantly.
It's not like I could go out and vote and next thing you know a someone died because of my vote.
Would your logic not suggest that people who voted for george w bush have blood on their hands because of Katrina and Iraq? Do Obama voters have blood on their hands because of drone strikes?
What about FDR and the atomic bombs?
If I'm in a car and "Steer and floor it" as someone else suggests, there's a huge chance I could maim myself, possibly kill myself I'm unlucky, even with a seatbelt.
Cars are rarely advertised with their power to stop other human beings from being mobile, or even possibly living.
I can fire a bunch of bullets and kill a lot of people. In that same amount of time in a car I'm just shifting into first.
I should've been way more verbose about what I believe in. But honestly, I saw the headline and I blew my goddamned stack, and I should've been way more clear here because I think it's really fucking ridiculous.
No, I don't believe the average gun owner is a raging gun fondling nut bar. In fact, the evidence shows way otherwise.
However, There's a CLEAR case that there are a LOT of unhinged gun enthusiasts out there.
And they are armed. And they have funny ideas about what freedom means. And they are also paranoid! Oh and they're pandered to by a major political party.
None of this is disconnected from reality, although I did say that rape threats were involved when in fact, it was really just general harassment and death threats. Sorry, I'm just so used to rape threats being part of the rage-o-sphere's response(MRA/MRMs, gun nuts, Philly's fans) to well, everything.
Still, I didn't mean to necessarily lump everyone who owns or likes guns in with the Cliven Bundy crowd but the fact of the matter is is that the Cliven Bundy crowd are more likely to harass and threaten someone like Belinda Padilla than the average gun enthusiast.
Source
One major caveat. I think I mixed up the process COMPLETELY. I believe that's backwards. Ban people who have been shown to be incapable of owning firearms, not TEST.
Still, mainstream gun owners support proposed mainstream gun legislation. It's the far fringe whack jobs who are in opposition.
This is a bizarre argument that is extra-constitutional.
The exact text of the 2nd amendment is,
What's funny is that the constitution has some pretty clear rules about what to do in cases of insurrection and treason.
Hint: The event that lead to the drafting of the constitution WAS insurrection against the US Government that was founded under the Articles of Confederation.
The idea that a person might have to be shown to be mentally competent and capable of owning and being responsible for a firearm isn't radical. It isn't even controversial outside of the gun nut circles. Even among mainstream GUN OWNERS, it's non-controversial.
Yet, it's these damned gun fetishists who are driving the gun policy and gun debate in this country. That's the problem. It's not the vast majority of people who own guns and are responsible, it's this lopsided minority that are willing to take up arms against federal officers to protect a guy who's freeloading off of federal lands or people who are extremely armed and vocal about their guns.
The rape threats, the murder threats, the wildly violent language...
if gun fondlers want to be thought of as reasonable people, then a lot of the people who took to the internet to harass and terrorize gun violence victims and those who are peddling smart gun tech need to be culled from the herd.
It's scary these people are *armed*
If you could point and click a car at random people and start maiming or killing them with no risk to the user, aside from someone retaliating, then sure.
Until then...
Procedural generation doesn't solve the problem of, "What should this thing look like?"
For that, you need actual like, oh artists.
It's allowed in Safari but not UI web views
http://daringfireball.net/2011...
Episodes 2 and 3 gave us Mace Windu.
We also got the death of Mace Windu, so it's kind of a wash, still, purple light saber > "UI formerly known as metro"
2.5ghz was troublesome. 15? Shit. No.
How many of those sites are actual web servers and how many of those web servers are in a cluster serving a single site?
Beats also owns rights to a lot of music for streaming. That's probably the killer part of the deal.
Keychain's encrypted. So I'm guessing no, but it could be back doored.
I wish I could unpost to moderate.
The term, "politically correct" should be replaced with, "stop being a jerk."
There are still a lot of people writing shrink-wrapped software.
That also doesn't negate "consumer grade software development would still be for academics and hobbyists" argument either.
You're insane if you think that absolute Free as in Freedom distribution of software is a good idea. Granted, it's the unreasonable people who make change in the world, but at some point you've got to be realistic.
The post I was replying to was swinging towards the Libertarian side of things with no care for the nuance of why in some markets, the barrier to entry is really high if not impossible to break into.
With most markets, they are exclusive rights areas.
But, yes, your local municipality is also doing it right.
Probably better than the way I outlined it.
Without commercial software, a lot of programmers would go hungry.
It stinks, but, the hard reality is that with out some direct way to get compensated for work, consumer grade software development would still be for academics and hobbyists. While this kind of work has given us GNU and Linux, it wouldn't give us things like Android or Quake.
Distributing source freely is a sucker's bet. Being able to compile an app from easily redistributable source?
Insane. I'd love to see someone try to run their business this way.
Well, it's a Government monopoly with no oversight.
Because practically speaking, you can't just let any yahoo with a garden trowel and some fiberoptic cables just start digging around everywhere, it's a freaking nightmare to do that.
If we had real oversight on telcos and cable cos, enforced fair sharing of infrastructure and had state and local Governments enforce rules that make sense... Then really, the problem goes away. Even better if the local municipalities installed the fiber and leased it out to the local markets, or treated it like a utility.
Again, practically speaking, a lot of rural and suburban markets would still be underserved, but, it wouldn't be so heavily one sided nor would the barrier to entry be so high.
I found that writing long or shorthand dampened my learning experience.
However, I'm pretty sure I'm an edge case. I had years of experience at call centers prior.
whoosh.
it's a joke. predicated on the fact that at launch, Skyrim had a quite a few problems.
Besides, no matter how clean or nice your machine was, the only people to blame for a bunch of the bugs, like the "horse can walk directly up mountains" glitch, were ZeniMax/Bethesda.
Even though it's long patched and fixed, the joke is just going to keep going around and around until a computer powerful enough to play Crysis can come around and stop this.
Not necessarily.
see: http://www.ebay.com/itm/Sony-S...
Studios still needed a way to replay VHS tapes from a variety of sources, such as mailed in VHS tapes from regular people. Production was done in a format that's derived from Beta, but not quite beta.
Way to trivialise. It's just one of the nastier example in a long pattern of behaviour from before that incident up to the present day. As usual, they only apologized for getting caught. Make no mistake, it's not the one incident that makes people hate Sony.
Were you even around /. during that time? Before the Geohot incident, before the removal of OtherOS, etc?
(BTW, going after geohot was justified. He leaked their goddamned root keys and taunted Sony.)
Wait what? Microsoft is off the hook for its evils now? Have you even read slashdot?
...said by someone who's UID is over 3 times mine.
No, seriously. The way people talk about Windows 7 around here you'd think it came with free hand jobs and cheetos on install.
Sony releases a few semi-dangerous CDs and they're *still* angry about that. The company that released the vulnerable OS is off the hook.
Yeah, the tech crowd sure is fickle.
i was talking about pharmaceuticals. The war on drugs is horse shit, although I think that keeping some drugs like meth and crack if not illegal, then somehow regulated, is generally a good idea. These are not kind drugs.