QUOTE: "Ever wondered why Firefox is only just approaching version 4 after more than 6 years, when Chrome is up to version 9 in just over 2 years?"
No because I don't give a fuck about things that don't matter.
The new policy is pretty ridiculous when you think about it. Chrome and Firefox will be up to version 40-something by the end of the decade. IMHO it's more logical to avoid such large numbers by using decimal points. Release 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 this year, not 5, 6, 7.
Looks like marketers have taken over. "Bigger numbers seller better! Let's release Firefox 15 as soon as possible!"
Luddites were not offended by cotton mills or machinery to assist them with their work.
They were offended by the cheap, inferior crap the bosses were putting-out, as it ripped-off the customers, and demanded quality control. (Sound familiar?)
>>>there is a huge amount of evidence available to even a casual observer
Well my "casual" observation shows there was another global warming period during the time of Ancient Egypt (circa 3500 BC) and again in the Roman Empire (circa 300-1300).
Clearly those global warming periods were not caused by cars, so there's no reason to think the present period is either. We need to find the REAL cause for these three Warming periods, which are not man-made.
>allow humans more leisure time without sacrificing the necessities and comforts they were accustomed to. But that hasn't really come to pass
Of course it has. You don't have to wash your clothes or dishes by hand on a Saturday. A machine does it, and does it whenever you want.
You don't have to plant food, harvest, milk the cows..... you just go to a store and buy it. And more recently, you just click "buy" at amazon and the food is shipped to you.
Life is MUCH easier then it used to be. If you don't believe me, consider that the KINGS of the year 1500 lived *worse* than the average commoner today. They didn't even have heat - or running water - they washed (if they washed at all) in cold water from a nearby stream or well.
The printing press put millions of scribes out of work, because machines could do the same job. Of course we still needed scribes (later renamed secretaries) --- just not as many.
Same with lawyers - we still need them; just not as many as currently exist. These persons will just have to learn new skills. Like maybe programming the computers which do document review.
Yes precisely. THE COURTS. Not random government employees demanding your facebook password, but a *judge* issuing a warrant, which lists probable cause. Not random searches performed by cops or gov't agents.
>>>Criticizing the government is clearly protected unlike actual hate speech.
Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech. THAT is what protects hate speech like "you nerd" or "you geek" or "you whitey". They are not allowed to censor what you say.
>>>I personally don't see anything in there that implies you can harass people or even the government.
Amendment 9. The rights not enumerated in the constitution are still reserved to the People. Amendment 10. The US government shall exercise no power that was not granted to it. i.e. It has no power to censor.
And finally consider the words of Thomas Jefferson, founder of your Democrat party: "You seem... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions --- a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power is the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.
"The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves..... But the Chief Justice says there must be an arbiter somewhere. True there must, but the ultimate arbiter is the people, as represented by their deputies in the State Legislatures. Let the States decide to which they meant to give power, and amend the constitution if necessary."
BOTH parental and minors' rights were abused. Parents have a right to privacy, and minors have a right to not be spied-on by School laptops while they are undressing in their bedrooms.
if you dismiss every one as a "troll" for any small problem, your community will not grow a lot and you'll leave people with a lot of bad taste in the mouth.
if you dismiss every one as a "troll" for any small problem, your community will not grow a lot and you'll leave people with a lot of bad taste in the mouth.
>>>They are spouting hate speech, slander and their speech is arguably threatening too so there is definitely room for arguing that it's not covered by freedom of speech.
That sounds great in theory. Until some future Congress decides "criticizing the government is hate speech" and thereby gets around the first amendment. It is wise to enforce the Constitution *exactly* as written without exceptions, and with the understanding that you are responsible for your speech (if you make a false accusation, like saying a teacher is a pedophile, you can be sued in court).
>>>State constitutions cannot remove rights granted to individuals by the US constitution.
That's true. Now try READING the constitution. It says CONGRESS may not limit speech (or press or religion). It says nothing to stop State Legislatures from doing so. That's why state constitutions were updated to include additional protections.
I had a 6th grade teacher who was a "pedophile" and said so on a public forum. He used to rub his hands over boy's chests in an erotic fashion (never did it to girls though - guess he figured that would get him in definitive trouble). The only difference is I and my friends discussed it on a Public BBS instead of facebook, and back then the government/school never monitored BBSes, so the "crime" went un-noticed.
I put crime in quotes, because if kids have suspicions of a teacher (and we did), they should be allowed to talk about it. Free speech and whatnot.
You're the same kind of dick as those who said, "Yes it was appropriate for schools to send laptops home, turn on the camera, and spy on kid's bedrooms."
NOBODY who is a government employee has any business reading private facebook or emails w/o first obtaining a warrant issued by a judge, and naming the reason for the search, backed by articulatable evidence why said person is a suspect.
>>>something like this is at most a civil tort of libel.
For an adult. For kids it's school expulsion, which they deserve. ----- Also free speech is unlimited but you still have to pay the consequences since most State constitutions read, "...shall be responsible for abuse thereof."
But I've been watching the European Union very closely. They've passed anti-liberty "directives" that look like they came straight out of old Communist Moscow. They just haven't had a chance to filter down to the common man yet, but pretty soon Europeans will find themselves getting arrested for all kinds of shit (like carrying protest signs).
It will make dictatorial US look like a haven in comparison.
First off, I think pretty much ALL music is shit. It's really just noise to me - something to keep me awake. But otherwise: screw it.
Second: I can do that now. It's called youtube. Or shoutcast. I can listen to any radio station in the world, free of charge, and without any stupid ~$130 "piracy tax" laid on top of me.
I don't know. I wonder if some of ye would enjoy living in Dictatorial Egypt or former Communist Germany, the way you sit here and justify the ___ reeming government is giving you. ("Heh heh, yeah I love being taxed half a week's wages. Thanks guv'mint! Give it to me hard.")
How about the fact it's a PRIVATE cemetery, and therefore the owner could charge them with trespassing. ("I asked them to leave, they refused, therefore I'm pressing charges.")
In MOST US states, recording conversations only requires the consent of ONE person. In this case, that would be the caller.
Of course would could also argue the cop was ON A PUBLIC STREET and therefore has "no expectation of privacy" to quote the US Supreme Court. It sounds like this case is destined to be over-turned.
Slashdot Mirror
Internet Explorer Special Edition
QUOTE: "Ever wondered why Firefox is only just approaching version 4 after more than 6 years, when Chrome is up to version 9 in just over 2 years?"
No because I don't give a fuck about things that don't matter.
The new policy is pretty ridiculous when you think about it. Chrome and Firefox will be up to version 40-something by the end of the decade. IMHO it's more logical to avoid such large numbers by using decimal points. Release 4.1, 4.2, 4.3 this year, not 5, 6, 7.
Looks like marketers have taken over. "Bigger numbers seller better! Let's release Firefox 15 as soon as possible!"
Luddites were not offended by cotton mills or machinery to assist them with their work.
They were offended by the cheap, inferior crap the bosses were putting-out, as it ripped-off the customers, and demanded quality control. (Sound familiar?)
>>>It's conceivable, that we're already hosed, no matter what our human stuff emits today or tomorrow
Pretty much. If current models are accurate, every human being could disappear today, and the earth would still be +2 degrees warmer in 2100.
"Never trust salesmen" is good advice (especially in the used market like amazon or ebay).
I would just add:
- Penn State, Maryland State, Virginia Tech, etc are ALSO salesmen
>>>there is a huge amount of evidence available to even a casual observer
Well my "casual" observation shows there was another global warming period during the time of Ancient Egypt (circa 3500 BC) and again in the Roman Empire (circa 300-1300).
Clearly those global warming periods were not caused by cars, so there's no reason to think the present period is either. We need to find the REAL cause for these three Warming periods, which are not man-made.
IMHO
>>>Let's agree not to call this a "Republican" or "Democratic" position
Right.
It's those nutty thieving Libertarians. (I joke.)
>allow humans more leisure time without sacrificing the necessities and comforts they were accustomed to. But that hasn't really come to pass
Of course it has. You don't have to wash your clothes or dishes by hand on a Saturday. A machine does it, and does it whenever you want.
You don't have to plant food, harvest, milk the cows..... you just go to a store and buy it. And more recently, you just click "buy" at amazon and the food is shipped to you.
Life is MUCH easier then it used to be. If you don't believe me, consider that the KINGS of the year 1500 lived *worse* than the average commoner today. They didn't even have heat - or running water - they washed (if they washed at all) in cold water from a nearby stream or well.
The printing press put millions of scribes out of work, because machines could do the same job. Of course we still needed scribes (later renamed secretaries) --- just not as many.
Same with lawyers - we still need them; just not as many as currently exist. These persons will just have to learn new skills. Like maybe programming the computers which do document review.
>>>The courts
Yes precisely. THE COURTS. Not random government employees demanding your facebook password, but a *judge* issuing a warrant, which lists probable cause. Not random searches performed by cops or gov't agents.
>>>Criticizing the government is clearly protected unlike actual hate speech.
Congress shall make no law abridging freedom of speech. THAT is what protects hate speech like "you nerd" or "you geek" or "you whitey". They are not allowed to censor what you say.
>>>I personally don't see anything in there that implies you can harass people or even the government.
Amendment 9. The rights not enumerated in the constitution are still reserved to the People. Amendment 10. The US government shall exercise no power that was not granted to it. i.e. It has no power to censor.
And finally consider the words of Thomas Jefferson, founder of your Democrat party: "You seem... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions --- a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps.... Their power is the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control.
"The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots. It has more wisely made all the departments co-equal and co-sovereign within themselves..... But the Chief Justice says there must be an arbiter somewhere. True there must, but the ultimate arbiter is the people, as represented by their deputies in the State Legislatures. Let the States decide to which they meant to give power, and amend the constitution if necessary."
BOTH parental and minors' rights were abused. Parents have a right to privacy, and minors have a right to not be spied-on by School laptops while they are undressing in their bedrooms.
>>>Please go on
Well, quoting the article:
if you dismiss every one as a "troll"
for any small problem, your community
will not grow a lot and you'll leave people
with a lot of bad taste in the mouth.
if you dismiss every one as a "troll"
for any small problem, your community
will not grow a lot and you'll leave people
with a lot of bad taste in the mouth.
>>>They are spouting hate speech, slander and their speech is arguably threatening too so there is definitely room for arguing that it's not covered by freedom of speech.
That sounds great in theory.
Until some future Congress decides "criticizing the government is hate speech" and thereby gets around the first amendment. It is wise to enforce the Constitution *exactly* as written without exceptions, and with the understanding that you are responsible for your speech (if you make a false accusation, like saying a teacher is a pedophile, you can be sued in court).
>>>State constitutions cannot remove rights granted to individuals by the US constitution.
That's true.
Now try READING the constitution. It says CONGRESS may not limit speech (or press or religion). It says nothing to stop State Legislatures from doing so. That's why state constitutions were updated to include additional protections.
I had a 6th grade teacher who was a "pedophile" and said so on a public forum. He used to rub his hands over boy's chests in an erotic fashion (never did it to girls though - guess he figured that would get him in definitive trouble). The only difference is I and my friends discussed it on a Public BBS instead of facebook, and back then the government/school never monitored BBSes, so the "crime" went un-noticed.
I put crime in quotes, because if kids have suspicions of a teacher (and we did), they should be allowed to talk about it. Free speech and whatnot.
Tomhudson:
You're the same kind of dick as those who said, "Yes it was appropriate for schools to send laptops home, turn on the camera, and spy on kid's bedrooms."
The line is pretty obvious:
NOBODY who is a government employee has any business reading private facebook or emails w/o first obtaining a warrant issued by a judge, and naming the reason for the search, backed by articulatable evidence why said person is a suspect.
>>>something like this is at most a civil tort of libel.
For an adult. For kids it's school expulsion, which they deserve. ----- Also free speech is unlimited but you still have to pay the consequences since most State constitutions read, "...shall be responsible for abuse thereof."
Why the hell was this modded "troll"
?
"I disagree" is not what mod points are for.
I know it's fun to bash the USA
But I've been watching the European Union very closely. They've passed anti-liberty "directives" that look like they came straight out of old Communist Moscow. They just haven't had a chance to filter down to the common man yet, but pretty soon Europeans will find themselves getting arrested for all kinds of shit (like carrying protest signs).
It will make dictatorial US look like a haven in comparison.
>>>you could listen to cool indie music
First off, I think pretty much ALL music is shit. It's really just noise to me - something to keep me awake. But otherwise: screw it.
Second:
I can do that now.
It's called youtube. Or shoutcast. I can listen to any radio station in the world, free of charge, and without any stupid ~$130 "piracy tax" laid on top of me.
I don't know. I wonder if some of ye would enjoy living in Dictatorial Egypt or former Communist Germany, the way you sit here and justify the ___ reeming government is giving you. ("Heh heh, yeah I love being taxed half a week's wages. Thanks guv'mint! Give it to me hard.")
How about the fact it's a PRIVATE cemetery, and therefore the owner could charge them with trespassing. ("I asked them to leave, they refused, therefore I'm pressing charges.")
In MOST US states, recording conversations only requires the consent of ONE person. In this case, that would be the caller.
Of course would could also argue the cop was ON A PUBLIC STREET and therefore has "no expectation of privacy" to quote the US Supreme Court. It sounds like this case is destined to be over-turned.