Insurance is only a part. Otherwise, with the stroke of a pen the Commission basically condemns over a million acres of land. It also means roads will be built higher, incurring extra cost and causing their own problems.
Basically, I think the NC-20 is mad this was done without any kind of economic impact study.
Most of the liberal press is using titles such as "NC Senate makes sea rise illegal" in order to immediately set the reader's mind to believing what the Senate is proposing is absurd. Slashdot used a fair title.
In realiity: This is 20 counties that will be financially hurt by the new (yes, new) estimate. Imagine you have plans for your county, and along comes one new report that allows a state bureaucratic unit to declare that a huge chunk of your county can no longer be developed. You get together with a bunch of other counties and petition the legislature to allow you to use your land.
The legislators are, rightfully, being responsive to the desires of those they represent.
What caused me to post is his sheer audacity. If people are buying large drinks in large enough numbers that stores sell them, and that health nuts think it's a big problem, then ipso facto THAT is what the people want. The mayor is lying.
If the public didn't want these big drinks, then the public wouldn't be buying these big drinks, problem solved. That's the public showing what it wants by doing what it does.
This is an autocratic nanny-state politician who's listening to a few lobbyists.
That you hear it a lot is pretty telling. All you need to do to experience it is edit an unofficially protected page. While the page isn't in official protection status, there will be a group of people who watch for any change on the page. They will instantly revert without explanation, which is in itself vandalism. With many against one, you will run up against 3RR. Any complaints will fall on deaf ears since they have a sympathetic admin backing them. You push it, you risk a temporary ban.
Pick any one with a topic sensitive to liberals, such as one relating to the social issues around homosexuality. Insert inconvenient fact that runs counter to the liberal conclusions made on the page. Watch the fun.
It was the the Arbitration Act of 1925 that allowed arbitration in contracts to be binding. Blame the politicians, not Scalia for reading the law as it is.
Instead of trying to get Scalia shot, try getting the current politicians to recognize the difference between negotiated contracts between equals with an arbitration clause, and adhesion contracts where the consumer has little or no power.
Liberal fucktards always think that nine people in black robes should be making the law, and blame them when the law sucks instead of blaming the people who actually wrote the law.
I think the reasonable approach is that corporations should have certain aspects of personhood necessary for them to function, in accordance with the public good. This should not be carried forward to the logical extreme that a corporation should have every single right of an actual citizen. Next thing you know, they'll be able to directly vote.
I would have assumed a fairly even distribution with Wikipedia so the results weren't that surprising.
I never expected even distribution. Those in charge tend to be liberal, and they will guard liberal articles that are important to them. You are a mere peon editor, so trying to insert factual information or even make the watched article consistent with the rest of Wikipedia will not be allowed. You will be reverted three times with no explanation, and any attempt by you to undo the vandalism will run you up against the three revert rule.
Now if only the folks that make monitors started playing this game, I would finally be able to get a monitor that has a higher resolution than my phone.
OS X Lion is loaded with high-dpi widgets and other evidence showing Apple is planning high-dpi displays soon, and Mountain Lion is even more so. It will likely start with a MacBook Pro 15" at 2880x1800. The 27" iMac would need 5120x2880, so that's probably going to wait on faster graphics.
The "Sahih" in this means that the source and the chain of narration of the Hadith is considered to be trustworthy. Of all Sahih Hadith, al-Bukhari is considered the most trustworthy. This means that to the average Muslim, there can be no doubt that Mohammed said this, and therefore that it must be true.
There is a very small minority of Muslims who reject all Hadith, believing only the Quran is authoritative and that it actually bans following texts such as Hadith. Mainstream Islam considers them to be apostates. Too bad, you remove Hadith, you remove much of the backwards, nasty stuff about the religion.
Nice distraction to phones, where this is notebooks. If I pick HP, Acer, Lenovo or Sony, with each one I can have dozens of choices. The worst is when you have two notebooks, one higher-end and one lower-end. Hey, maybe I can save money on the lower end one. Then you start configuring them and find that the lower-end runs straight through the high-end's price, then you're back to wondering which one to get. And that's when they have only two, but as I showed, HP has about ten.
I can do that too -- randomly pick a popular product / company! I will buy only products that have... uh... the GALAXY S brand of phones!
Again, not quite so easy. Samsung is a manufacturer like Apple. From Samsung you have the choices of at least Note, the Gem, the Illusion, the Exec. And then there's the Galaxy, of which a long list of different hardware variations exist.
The others have a wide variety of products with a confusing list of options. Apple is simple, two questions let you decide: Can you afford the latest model, and how much memory can you afford.
So congratulations, they've purchased an inferior device
Inferior or superior is influenced by the needs and desires of the individual buyer. NFC? Don't want. No DLNA built-in? Isn't that why we have apps? Hey, does your HTC have AirPlay built in, or even available? HDMI? I still do not know one person who has ever needed HDMI on a phone. Three -finger swipe up to switch to -- a POS media software? Why?
I am an iPhone owner, having recently switched from Android because all Android phones at renewal time sucked in comparison -- to me, which is what's important. For example, others said "But the RAZR has a bigger screen!" and that's exactly why the RAZR wasn't in the running, screen's too big to be a phone, which I realized the second I picked one up. The iPhone having a better camera than the rest was pretty important too. And it being built very solidly as opposed to the flimsy and cheap-feeling Galaxy was a big plus.
Every laptop vendor seems to want to sell a dozen different, poorly-differentiated models, with no real way of finding out what is customizable without following each model to its own customization page.
Limited? Of course. But it is a very good example of how to reduce consumer confusion to make purchasing easy. I was looking for laptops and HP for example has, depending on how you look at it, about ten different kinds of notebooks with overlapping screen sizes, options and prices. It's highly customizable to get exactly what you want -- if you know exactly what you want and want to put the effort into sorting it all out. I found it rather confusing.
But if you go Apple you have a first choice: Do you want an ultra-portable or full-size? You you choose screen size. After that, you're pretty much down to choosing processor, memory and storage on one page. Multiple drill-down is drastically reduced.
See? Easy, and perfectly addresses the OP's problem of too many choices, so many he writes Slashdot for help.
Boomers were developed in the context of the Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine. They were meant to make sure we could get that return shot off even if the USSR wiped out all of our missile sites in the first strike. Yes, this makes them Cold War relics, although they still have some usefulness in the current environment.
Those are Cold War relics, although some have been converted for modern times with Tomahawks. This is an attack sub, perfect for protecting other warships, protecting general shipping, delivering SEAL teams, and launching conventional tactical strikes against land-based targets. These are the backbone of our fleet, and relatively cheap given the number that have been produced. In general, as far as bang-for-buck in Navy equipment, they are about the best -- very effective and very hard to kill.
we no longer need to be spending more on our military than every other country in the world combined
Good point. We need to stop protecting all these other nations of the world. Let North Korea overrun the South, let China take over Taiwan, etc. Let them fully pay for their own defense.
and stop spending our grandkid's money.
Of the thousands of things the federal government spends money on without constitutional authority, at least Navy spending one of the few things that is actually authorized.
a move so cynical, you almost can't even see the average neocon supporting something like it
Does that explain why conservatives are calling for Holder's head, and why liberals have been running interference for him?
Turn your attention to the President who claims the power to assassinate Americans abroad
Killing Americans who are fighting for the other side during armed conflict has precedent at least back to WWII. Unless you surrender, you are fair game for being killed by whatever method we deem appropriate.
And those were real Americans. Al-Awlaki was born in the US by Yemeni student parents, and if we had sane laws that wouldn't grant citizenship. Then for the rest of his life he identified as a Yemeni citizen, even coming back to the US briefly to study on a foreign student visa from Yemen.
Only if you are partisan as so many are. Only Democrats would care about accessibility, supposedly. Kerry being rich on unearned family wealth is okay, but Romney with a fraction of that wealth self-made is evil because of it. Bush passing a stimulus was good, Obama passing it was bad. Etc.
That's a quick and easy one. The federal government doesn't educate anybody, that's the job of the states. If you want info on education in your state, or a state you're looking to move to, get it from that state where the education is being managed and performed.
he would have told them to adhere to strict HTML standards without vendor extensions, and W3C accessibility guidelines
That's known as Section 508 compliance. In addition to basic accessibility, the law says an access board will further establish guidelines, and among them are adherence to standards and ommission of non-compliant plug-ins.
In case you want to slap a party label on it, this was introduced by Democrats during a Republican-controlled Congress and passed. The cynical (and usually right when it comes to politics) side of me says that because this was introduced by two California Democrats, one of them the rep for Silicon Valley, there was motivation to funnel money to the tech companies that would likely be haired to overhaul sites to compliance.
I find it really odd that some US citizens thing that the US militaty might is a benefit to the rest. That's like the bully at school thinking that his bulling is a contribution to the character development of his school mates.
More like the nice jock who protects less fortunate kids. We are in Saudi Arabia now because a bully decided he wanted to take some stuff. We are in Korea because an insane bully could have decided to beat them up at any moment over the last 50 years. We were in Europe initially because we beat a bully, then because another bully threatened to beat everyone else up. We did have a history of meddling in Latin America, basically supporting any bully who was an enemy of our main bully nemesis.
I mean, that's how pointless going back to that distant time is.
Which is why I refused to go back in time at all. We're dealing with today's situation, regardless of history.
But by basically dismantling the Empire and carving up chunks of it amongst the Great Powers, we let the genie out of the bottle.
The dismantling of the Ottoman empire wasn't done overnight at the end of WWI by the big powers. It was a decades-long process as the Ottomans lost various territories to other regional powers long before WWI. Of course, they conquered much of this territory in the first place, bringing disparate ethnicities, nationalities and religions under their power.
This is the problem with Westerners, we refuse to see our part in the insanity, and just tar an entire religion, whose adherents come from a vast number of different cultural milieus, with a single brush.
How about religious tolerance? Most of the worst countries in the world when it comes to freedom of religion are Muslim. Even when other religions are legally tolerated, social pressures do not tolerate them. Example, in Indonesia where the burning of Christian churches by Muslims is fairly common although the religion is technically allowed. I'm trying hard to think of one Muslim country with a social and legal level of freedom of religion equal to most Western countries.
Or try this: Ask any Muslim if they think it would be okay for a synagogue, church, and Buddhist and Sikh temples to be built in Mecca, their adherents free to attend services. What percentage do you think would say it should be allowed?. The Muslims have control of their three holiest places in the world. How many Muslims do you think would agree that in the interest of fairness and good inter-religion relations, their #3 should give up its spot to allow the Jews to have their #1 that pre-dates Islam itself (that is, among the Muslims who even recognize that the Temple ever existed)? You know what the answer is.
I'm willing to bet that a majority of Muslims would agree that my posts here should not be allowed because they offend them. Where it really matters, in basic issues of freedom and dealing with non-Muslims, the broad brush fits.
Let's hope they grow up before some Western power gets tired of it and breaks out the nukes.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny about how the UK gets a pass, when it was their idea to overthrow the government and install the Shaw in order to protect their oil interests.
Insurance is only a part. Otherwise, with the stroke of a pen the Commission basically condemns over a million acres of land. It also means roads will be built higher, incurring extra cost and causing their own problems.
Basically, I think the NC-20 is mad this was done without any kind of economic impact study.
I read the law, there's no kill switch provision in there at all. Nobody has ever been able to point it out to me.
Most of the liberal press is using titles such as "NC Senate makes sea rise illegal" in order to immediately set the reader's mind to believing what the Senate is proposing is absurd. Slashdot used a fair title.
In realiity: This is 20 counties that will be financially hurt by the new (yes, new) estimate. Imagine you have plans for your county, and along comes one new report that allows a state bureaucratic unit to declare that a huge chunk of your county can no longer be developed. You get together with a bunch of other counties and petition the legislature to allow you to use your land.
The legislators are, rightfully, being responsive to the desires of those they represent.
I take it you mean who? There a health nut lobby.
What caused me to post is his sheer audacity. If people are buying large drinks in large enough numbers that stores sell them, and that health nuts think it's a big problem, then ipso facto THAT is what the people want. The mayor is lying.
Death (TM) brand cigarettes came in a black box with a skull and crossbones. They were quite popular.
If the public didn't want these big drinks, then the public wouldn't be buying these big drinks, problem solved. That's the public showing what it wants by doing what it does.
This is an autocratic nanny-state politician who's listening to a few lobbyists.
That you hear it a lot is pretty telling. All you need to do to experience it is edit an unofficially protected page. While the page isn't in official protection status, there will be a group of people who watch for any change on the page. They will instantly revert without explanation, which is in itself vandalism. With many against one, you will run up against 3RR. Any complaints will fall on deaf ears since they have a sympathetic admin backing them. You push it, you risk a temporary ban.
Pick any one with a topic sensitive to liberals, such as one relating to the social issues around homosexuality. Insert inconvenient fact that runs counter to the liberal conclusions made on the page. Watch the fun.
It was the the Arbitration Act of 1925 that allowed arbitration in contracts to be binding. Blame the politicians, not Scalia for reading the law as it is.
Instead of trying to get Scalia shot, try getting the current politicians to recognize the difference between negotiated contracts between equals with an arbitration clause, and adhesion contracts where the consumer has little or no power.
Liberal fucktards always think that nine people in black robes should be making the law, and blame them when the law sucks instead of blaming the people who actually wrote the law.
I think the reasonable approach is that corporations should have certain aspects of personhood necessary for them to function, in accordance with the public good. This should not be carried forward to the logical extreme that a corporation should have every single right of an actual citizen. Next thing you know, they'll be able to directly vote.
I never expected even distribution. Those in charge tend to be liberal, and they will guard liberal articles that are important to them. You are a mere peon editor, so trying to insert factual information or even make the watched article consistent with the rest of Wikipedia will not be allowed. You will be reverted three times with no explanation, and any attempt by you to undo the vandalism will run you up against the three revert rule.
OS X Lion is loaded with high-dpi widgets and other evidence showing Apple is planning high-dpi displays soon, and Mountain Lion is even more so. It will likely start with a MacBook Pro 15" at 2880x1800. The 27" iMac would need 5120x2880, so that's probably going to wait on faster graphics.
The "Sahih" in this means that the source and the chain of narration of the Hadith is considered to be trustworthy. Of all Sahih Hadith, al-Bukhari is considered the most trustworthy. This means that to the average Muslim, there can be no doubt that Mohammed said this, and therefore that it must be true.
There is a very small minority of Muslims who reject all Hadith, believing only the Quran is authoritative and that it actually bans following texts such as Hadith. Mainstream Islam considers them to be apostates. Too bad, you remove Hadith, you remove much of the backwards, nasty stuff about the religion.
Nice distraction to phones, where this is notebooks. If I pick HP, Acer, Lenovo or Sony, with each one I can have dozens of choices. The worst is when you have two notebooks, one higher-end and one lower-end. Hey, maybe I can save money on the lower end one. Then you start configuring them and find that the lower-end runs straight through the high-end's price, then you're back to wondering which one to get. And that's when they have only two, but as I showed, HP has about ten.
Again, not quite so easy. Samsung is a manufacturer like Apple. From Samsung you have the choices of at least Note, the Gem, the Illusion, the Exec. And then there's the Galaxy, of which a long list of different hardware variations exist.
The others have a wide variety of products with a confusing list of options. Apple is simple, two questions let you decide: Can you afford the latest model, and how much memory can you afford.
Inferior or superior is influenced by the needs and desires of the individual buyer. NFC? Don't want. No DLNA built-in? Isn't that why we have apps? Hey, does your HTC have AirPlay built in, or even available? HDMI? I still do not know one person who has ever needed HDMI on a phone. Three -finger swipe up to switch to -- a POS media software? Why?
I am an iPhone owner, having recently switched from Android because all Android phones at renewal time sucked in comparison -- to me, which is what's important. For example, others said "But the RAZR has a bigger screen!" and that's exactly why the RAZR wasn't in the running, screen's too big to be a phone, which I realized the second I picked one up. The iPhone having a better camera than the rest was pretty important too. And it being built very solidly as opposed to the flimsy and cheap-feeling Galaxy was a big plus.
The problem is in how they want peace. The world will supposedly be at peace when it is entirely run by Muslims, all others killed or subjugated.
No, it's perfect conception. The OP said
Limited? Of course. But it is a very good example of how to reduce consumer confusion to make purchasing easy. I was looking for laptops and HP for example has, depending on how you look at it, about ten different kinds of notebooks with overlapping screen sizes, options and prices. It's highly customizable to get exactly what you want -- if you know exactly what you want and want to put the effort into sorting it all out. I found it rather confusing.
But if you go Apple you have a first choice: Do you want an ultra-portable or full-size? You you choose screen size. After that, you're pretty much down to choosing processor, memory and storage on one page. Multiple drill-down is drastically reduced.
See? Easy, and perfectly addresses the OP's problem of too many choices, so many he writes Slashdot for help.
Boomers were developed in the context of the Mutually Assured Destruction doctrine. They were meant to make sure we could get that return shot off even if the USSR wiped out all of our missile sites in the first strike. Yes, this makes them Cold War relics, although they still have some usefulness in the current environment.
Those are Cold War relics, although some have been converted for modern times with Tomahawks.
This is an attack sub, perfect for protecting other warships, protecting general shipping, delivering SEAL teams, and launching conventional tactical strikes against land-based targets. These are the backbone of our fleet, and relatively cheap given the number that have been produced. In general, as far as bang-for-buck in Navy equipment, they are about the best -- very effective and very hard to kill.
Good point. We need to stop protecting all these other nations of the world. Let North Korea overrun the South, let China take over Taiwan, etc. Let them fully pay for their own defense.
Of the thousands of things the federal government spends money on without constitutional authority, at least Navy spending one of the few things that is actually authorized.
Does that explain why conservatives are calling for Holder's head, and why liberals have been running interference for him?
Killing Americans who are fighting for the other side during armed conflict has precedent at least back to WWII. Unless you surrender, you are fair game for being killed by whatever method we deem appropriate.
And those were real Americans. Al-Awlaki was born in the US by Yemeni student parents, and if we had sane laws that wouldn't grant citizenship. Then for the rest of his life he identified as a Yemeni citizen, even coming back to the US briefly to study on a foreign student visa from Yemen.
Only if you are partisan as so many are. Only Democrats would care about accessibility, supposedly. Kerry being rich on unearned family wealth is okay, but Romney with a fraction of that wealth self-made is evil because of it. Bush passing a stimulus was good, Obama passing it was bad. Etc.
A lot of government pages are way behind the times, and often still use tables for formatting.
That's a quick and easy one. The federal government doesn't educate anybody, that's the job of the states. If you want info on education in your state, or a state you're looking to move to, get it from that state where the education is being managed and performed.
That's known as Section 508 compliance. In addition to basic accessibility, the law says an access board will further establish guidelines, and among them are adherence to standards and ommission of non-compliant plug-ins.
In case you want to slap a party label on it, this was introduced by Democrats during a Republican-controlled Congress and passed. The cynical (and usually right when it comes to politics) side of me says that because this was introduced by two California Democrats, one of them the rep for Silicon Valley, there was motivation to funnel money to the tech companies that would likely be haired to overhaul sites to compliance.
More like the nice jock who protects less fortunate kids. We are in Saudi Arabia now because a bully decided he wanted to take some stuff. We are in Korea because an insane bully could have decided to beat them up at any moment over the last 50 years. We were in Europe initially because we beat a bully, then because another bully threatened to beat everyone else up. We did have a history of meddling in Latin America, basically supporting any bully who was an enemy of our main bully nemesis.
Which is why I refused to go back in time at all. We're dealing with today's situation, regardless of history.
The dismantling of the Ottoman empire wasn't done overnight at the end of WWI by the big powers. It was a decades-long process as the Ottomans lost various territories to other regional powers long before WWI. Of course, they conquered much of this territory in the first place, bringing disparate ethnicities, nationalities and religions under their power.
How about religious tolerance? Most of the worst countries in the world when it comes to freedom of religion are Muslim. Even when other religions are legally tolerated, social pressures do not tolerate them. Example, in Indonesia where the burning of Christian churches by Muslims is fairly common although the religion is technically allowed. I'm trying hard to think of one Muslim country with a social and legal level of freedom of religion equal to most Western countries.
Or try this: Ask any Muslim if they think it would be okay for a synagogue, church, and Buddhist and Sikh temples to be built in Mecca, their adherents free to attend services. What percentage do you think would say it should be allowed?. The Muslims have control of their three holiest places in the world. How many Muslims do you think would agree that in the interest of fairness and good inter-religion relations, their #3 should give up its spot to allow the Jews to have their #1 that pre-dates Islam itself (that is, among the Muslims who even recognize that the Temple ever existed)? You know what the answer is.
I'm willing to bet that a majority of Muslims would agree that my posts here should not be allowed because they offend them. Where it really matters, in basic issues of freedom and dealing with non-Muslims, the broad brush fits.
Let's hope they grow up before some Western power gets tired of it and breaks out the nukes.