So the Chinese and Syrian people have a representative in the UN. That's great, but how does it represent those people in any way? They are not choosing who represents them, the government they have no say in is choosing these people. I believe that was the GP's point.
I hear this a lot about apps. I'll admit that it is a factor, but for how long. How many apps are needed for a device? Obviously, we don't need all the apps that are really just an app version of a companies website, do we? How many different apps that are the same type of game are needed?
I find it hard to believe that there are too many specific use cases where Android doesn't have an app that will work. Once all the use cases are filled in, additional apps are just other ways to do the same things.
Why would you bring up the Bill of Rights as being opposed to the NRA's position? The Bill of Rights is the only foundation that they use to establish their position on firearm rights.
this doesn't really apply to the UK or other countries that don't have everybody armed to the teeth.
I assume you're referring to the US with this statement. The US may have a lot more guns per capita, but there are definitely large sections of the population that do not have any guns. Then there are those that have guns that just sit in their homes stored wherever and rarely come out at all. The US is not a mad max zone of people wandering around touting firearms.
why does it have to relate at all? This is a discussion thread.
If it must relate to Apple And Amazon, they both sell books and the comment you replied to is talking about a book seller and the idea of laws regulating what they sell.
And yes, there should be laws against public companies censoring information. This doesn't mean every bookstore has to carry Debbie Does Dallas. What it means is that a public company can't overtly censor material, like what Apple just did.
Actually, it sounds like your law would be that every bookstore does have to carry Debbie Does Dallas (the book of course)
A private company does not have to sell anyone's book. Or they can make a deal to sell it if it is modified (censored, but willingly by the author to get the book in the store).
Freedom of speech lets someone write whatever book they want. It also let's someone else, such as a private company, decide they don't want to repeat those words.
Amiga computers used 68k series Moto chips NOT PowerPC.
Someone may have bought the Amiga name and put it on a box with a PowerPC chip, they also may have put the name on a box full of crap. A lot of terrible things have been done to the name since Commodore's bankruptcy.
The birth rate decline in western nations correlates best with raising educations. If this is the true cause, improving educations in third world nations is the solution. A more educated populace will decide on their own that having so many children is a bad idea.
Every Western nation with advancing education for the population has seen a decreasing birth rate. The birth rate world-wide is still high because there are a lot of poor, uneducated third world nations that have not had declines in birth rates.
It is absolutely far more likely that everyone is worth different amounts than whatever scenario you are talking about. Are you suggesting that there are large amounts of people that have the exact same net worth, down to the nearest penny?
Let's not even begin to mention how misguided your use of the word "vector" is.
While I agree with you that not having children would make poor peoples financial situations more tenable. I don't think that wealth is a good measure of who's genes should be selected to carry into the next generation.
We need to change our society. If we have robots that build everything for us, we should all be able to survive without slaving away doing menial tasks. That's the point of automation isn't it?
Our current society doesn't value automation as a tool to save humans from terrible work, but as a way for people to amass more and more wealth by reducing or eliminating labor costs. All at the expense of the unemployed workers.
Do you think its a common occurrence for Americans to watch each other get killed or shot at? Unless I am somewhere that people are hunting or in a sporting goods store, it is extremely rare to actually see a gun.
Why do so many people in this thread assume that any one with a gun on them would instantly start wildly shooting? If I was there with a firearm, I would try to make it to the exits first and only shoot if absolutely necessary.
When you compare different countries laws and use the term "sane" for one group, your argument is dripping in bias. You are not worth arguing with about this as your mind is completely shut off to differing opinions.
The concealed carry requirements actually go down to the lowest level of training of "none" for at least one state (AK).
There are clearly other social differences between the US and Switzerland that would have an effect on relative occurrences of mass shootings in the two countries. Prevelance of guns in a population and the populations training in gun use are far from the whole picture on why people develop mental health issues that cause them to go on shooting sprees. I would also argue that the simple fact that there is now a history of shooting sprees in the US makes it more likely for additional incidents to occur.
It's good you keep those boxes. You're going to have to move soon to a bigger place so you have room for all of your boxes.
I've known many people that keep the boxes, I don't. I'd rather not spend time unpacking and repacking rarely used items like that. If I don't use something enough to justify keeping it out of its packaging. I don't need that item.
I swear in the past they had a setting to stop people from tagging me in photos that others post on Facebook. Just recently, I got a notification that I had been tagged in a photo. Big surprise that when I logged in to look, the setting hadn't been changed, it was gone. I found no way to stop this tagging of photos now. I guess I just can't let tagging types take pictures of me now.
Let me start by saying I have a Facebook account, but would not call myself a Facebook user. I don't post anything on there.
Now that that is out of the way, I have heard anecdotal evidence that Facebook does have some way to do grouping. Even if this is true, it points out an issue Facebook will have a hard time getting over. If it didn't have it when it started up, and they add a feature later, a lot of people will never know about it. Others will be upset with changes.
I like the way G+ has been set up from the beginning. It seems like more of a useful tool to me than a way to annoy people with ads and requests to do meaningless things. Of course I don't really use G+ much more than Facebook.
Slashdot Mirror
So the Chinese and Syrian people have a representative in the UN. That's great, but how does it represent those people in any way? They are not choosing who represents them, the government they have no say in is choosing these people. I believe that was the GP's point.
I hear this a lot about apps. I'll admit that it is a factor, but for how long. How many apps are needed for a device? Obviously, we don't need all the apps that are really just an app version of a companies website, do we? How many different apps that are the same type of game are needed?
I find it hard to believe that there are too many specific use cases where Android doesn't have an app that will work. Once all the use cases are filled in, additional apps are just other ways to do the same things.
Why would you bring up the Bill of Rights as being opposed to the NRA's position? The Bill of Rights is the only foundation that they use to establish their position on firearm rights.
Yes, but they did print their way around any background checks related to obtaining a gun. The remaining parts can be bought by anyone.
this doesn't really apply to the UK or other countries that don't have everybody armed to the teeth.
I assume you're referring to the US with this statement. The US may have a lot more guns per capita, but there are definitely large sections of the population that do not have any guns. Then there are those that have guns that just sit in their homes stored wherever and rarely come out at all. The US is not a mad max zone of people wandering around touting firearms.
why does it have to relate at all? This is a discussion thread.
If it must relate to Apple And Amazon, they both sell books and the comment you replied to is talking about a book seller and the idea of laws regulating what they sell.
It's always fun to see someones first foe.
And yes, there should be laws against public companies censoring information. This doesn't mean every bookstore has to carry Debbie Does Dallas. What it means is that a public company can't overtly censor material, like what Apple just did.
Actually, it sounds like your law would be that every bookstore does have to carry Debbie Does Dallas (the book of course)
A private company does not have to sell anyone's book. Or they can make a deal to sell it if it is modified (censored, but willingly by the author to get the book in the store).
Freedom of speech lets someone write whatever book they want. It also let's someone else, such as a private company, decide they don't want to repeat those words.
okay then, you can take the 2 values of on and off for a transistor and do quite a lot with that.
1991 - PowerPC... (and also Amiga computers).
Amiga computers used 68k series Moto chips NOT PowerPC.
Someone may have bought the Amiga name and put it on a box with a PowerPC chip, they also may have put the name on a box full of crap. A lot of terrible things have been done to the name since Commodore's bankruptcy.
The birth rate decline in western nations correlates best with raising educations. If this is the true cause, improving educations in third world nations is the solution. A more educated populace will decide on their own that having so many children is a bad idea.
Every Western nation with advancing education for the population has seen a decreasing birth rate. The birth rate world-wide is still high because there are a lot of poor, uneducated third world nations that have not had declines in birth rates.
Then you should have no problem at all with going to the antarctic.
It is absolutely far more likely that everyone is worth different amounts than whatever scenario you are talking about. Are you suggesting that there are large amounts of people that have the exact same net worth, down to the nearest penny?
Let's not even begin to mention how misguided your use of the word "vector" is.
While I agree with you that not having children would make poor peoples financial situations more tenable. I don't think that wealth is a good measure of who's genes should be selected to carry into the next generation.
We need to change our society. If we have robots that build everything for us, we should all be able to survive without slaving away doing menial tasks. That's the point of automation isn't it?
Our current society doesn't value automation as a tool to save humans from terrible work, but as a way for people to amass more and more wealth by reducing or eliminating labor costs. All at the expense of the unemployed workers.
Until we get some testing, he may have been shooting blanks.
Do you think its a common occurrence for Americans to watch each other get killed or shot at? Unless I am somewhere that people are hunting or in a sporting goods store, it is extremely rare to actually see a gun.
Why do so many people in this thread assume that any one with a gun on them would instantly start wildly shooting? If I was there with a firearm, I would try to make it to the exits first and only shoot if absolutely necessary.
When you compare different countries laws and use the term "sane" for one group, your argument is dripping in bias. You are not worth arguing with about this as your mind is completely shut off to differing opinions.
How could this have anything to do with the movie's plot? Unless this dude got a pre-release screening of the movie. This was the midnight premiere.
The concealed carry requirements actually go down to the lowest level of training of "none" for at least one state (AK).
There are clearly other social differences between the US and Switzerland that would have an effect on relative occurrences of mass shootings in the two countries. Prevelance of guns in a population and the populations training in gun use are far from the whole picture on why people develop mental health issues that cause them to go on shooting sprees. I would also argue that the simple fact that there is now a history of shooting sprees in the US makes it more likely for additional incidents to occur.
It's good you keep those boxes. You're going to have to move soon to a bigger place so you have room for all of your boxes.
I've known many people that keep the boxes, I don't. I'd rather not spend time unpacking and repacking rarely used items like that. If I don't use something enough to justify keeping it out of its packaging. I don't need that item.
I swear in the past they had a setting to stop people from tagging me in photos that others post on Facebook. Just recently, I got a notification that I had been tagged in a photo. Big surprise that when I logged in to look, the setting hadn't been changed, it was gone. I found no way to stop this tagging of photos now. I guess I just can't let tagging types take pictures of me now.
Let me start by saying I have a Facebook account, but would not call myself a Facebook user. I don't post anything on there.
Now that that is out of the way, I have heard anecdotal evidence that Facebook does have some way to do grouping. Even if this is true, it points out an issue Facebook will have a hard time getting over. If it didn't have it when it started up, and they add a feature later, a lot of people will never know about it. Others will be upset with changes.
I like the way G+ has been set up from the beginning. It seems like more of a useful tool to me than a way to annoy people with ads and requests to do meaningless things. Of course I don't really use G+ much more than Facebook.