I'm left-handed and I cannot use a mouse with my left hand... You learn to adapt to a right-handed world just like the blind adapt to a sighted world and the deaf adapt to a world full of sound.
I'd say have your wife write an autobiography if she still feels up to it. My grandmother died recently and had a few years before written an autobiography to one of my cousins. My aunt typed up a digital copy for all of us. THAT was a wonderful thing to receive. I knew my grandmother for the last 30 years of her life. But, I had very little idea about the previous 60+ years. I imagine your daughters reading about their mom prior to their birth, or maybe even during the time they were very little too, would be a great memory to have.
Also, the funeral home we have used offers an online area at mem.com for loved ones who have passed. It includes some photos in a video form, some text about the person, a guestbook where friends can write things, etc. It was included in the entire package and is permanent (no monthly or yearly fees).
Why should I care if I get more bang for the buck from going from 10 mpg to 20 mpg vs. going from 33 mpg to 50 mpg? What I care about at the end is how much I'm going to spend going from car #1 to car #2. And, I imagine the vast majority of people care about that.
As long as I can calculate cost per tank on car #1 vs. car #2 then I can plan a budget accordingly. I think most people care more about that.
I care more about the freedom to download the content than the speed. The government having regulatory capabilities in this regard is dangerous. Even having a little is dangerous as the federal government has shown repeatedly that when it gets a little power it always seeks more. Even through various iterations of congress, presidents, court justices, etc. things get bigger and bigger (SS, Medicare, IRS, taxes, it never ends).
I care about letting the free market dictate the speed aspect. Yes, I understand collusion and such, but the free market isn't an immediate fix, it is a consistent fix. Give it time and speeds will increase. How do I know? What percentage of people had no internet access just 20 years ago? How about 10 years ago? What percentage had broadband access 10 years ago? How about now? What was the average broadband rate 10 years ago? How about now? I've had Time Warner in several states and noticed speed ups (not just in different states, but even over time in the same cities).
If you all you care about is speed, that is your choice and I wish you well. But, I'd rather have assurance of the freedom to download said content at all!
Look up the 10th amendment. The DOE has no right to exist. I applaud Texas on a great step forward to teach what has really happened in American history rather than the progressives' revisionist history. And I would agree with other states stepping up to the plate and taking charge of their own education rather than let the DOE do it for them. The federal govt. is already too big.
No I didn't read the article, but my impressions from the summary is just socialist thinking. To reference Europe as a model for America is silly. The problem is not too many graduates, it is too much socialism being perpetuated upon American society. If those in govt. stood back and stopped interfering in free market capitalism then the market would take care of the issue. It might not fix things overnight, but it would ALWAYS fix such things in the long run.
Homosexuality is a choice, not biology, regardless of what crank science says. Race is based off biology, not choice, and is readily observed. You cannot equate the two, sorry. Further,
1. "marriage is between a man and a woman" is the firm belief of many people based on religious principles. That is not bigoted regardless of how much some on/. think most/all religious people are blind religious zealots who do not think for themselves and hate others as a result. THAT kind of stereotype is close-minded.
2. "coloreds don't drink from the white fountation" is based off of bigotry. No one chooses their race anymore than someone chooses to be conceived and subsequently born. Such behavior in America's past was shameful.
3. Using #1 as an argument to whether or not two people of the same gender can live together is wrong.
4. Polls show that most people in America believe in #1, so get over it. Just because people believe in #1, doesn't mean they're going to beat down the doors of a homosexual and get violent with them. Nor, does it mean such people will argue against homosexuals carrying life insurance, holding various jobs, etc.
It's the difference between tolerance and acceptance. I can tolerate the RIGHT of a homosexual to CHOOSE how to live THEIR OWN LIFE... That RIGHT to CHOOSE is something they are granted by God. But, that in no way means I have to ACCEPT such choices, just as God does not accept such choices. To force me to accept that is to take away my rights to choose how to live and what to believe.
Not entirely accurate... the federal government FORCED some of these banks to make bad loans that the banks normally would not have done. This falls firmly in the lap of Barney Franks and a few others.
I agree with earlier post that regulation is part of the problem. Yes, some laws need to exist to minimize unethical behavior, most especially when one party is harming another and the harmed party either did not know in advance or was strong-armed into it. Beyond that, the free market system works when the government stays out of the way.
It is truly scary that so many on/. defend government intervention so readily... especially those in the USA. The federal government fails so often and ignores the constitution and bill of rights so often it is ridiculous. I hope soon all 50 states stand up and ram the 10th amendment down the federal government's throat.
a state that every American, with any kind of attention span, knows is broke and needs to CUT spending is creating more financially wasteful bureaucracy. California you truly love to live up to your title as the land of fruits and nuts, don't you?
Then I suggest you research THOROUGHLY which countries have the most advanced technologies, the best medical care/treatments, the best health-insurance coverage, the most prosperous people per capita, the most opportunities for advancement, etc, etc.
Hint: Orange county is a part of the top country for these things. Albeit, many currently in power are trying to ruin it with socialist and communist ideas... a problem to be rectified in November.
Communism is only good on the surface, but fails miserably EVERY time and history shows it.
This comment and the GP are the reason why "We the people" need to start standing up to our government and REMINDING them that they work for us, period! If it is my land and my home, then you (the govt at any level) should have zero say in what I do provided that I'm not committing a violent offense... the ol' "Your rights end where my face begins" kind of thing. Even if the bank owns it, the problem is solely a private matter between me and the bank unless the bank decides to sue.
This kind of nonsense wouldn't even be law if we stood up en masse and said "No more".
I think I like the 861 MPH better... "If my calculations are correct, when this baby gets up to 861 MPH, you're going to see some serious stuff"... CRASH! KABOOM!
Yes, and Galileo was in the minority once too. What's your point? Science is infallible, scientists are not. It is possible for human passions to mislead people on either side of an argument/debate regardless of how many degrees they have. I am glad there are those here willing to ask, "Do the facts fit global warming/climate change?" instead of "How do the facts fit global warming/climate change?"
Sorry, the majority can, and has many times, been wrong. The skeptics have every right to speak up and it is the duty of scientists to speak up from time to time and question, "Is it so?" instead of "How does this fit with what we already 'know'?" No one doubts, "2 + 2 = 4", but that doesn't apply to every "fact" we think we know.
Bah, that's where capitalism shines... if it's a sink or swim proposition, those who actually care about swimming will adapt. And they will do it without sacrificing real journalism. NYT has been shrinking for a long time while Fox News has record numbers. That's just capitalism working as intended.
atheism is more than simply lack of belief in a deity. consider some definitions: atheism - assertion that no deity exists ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism ) agnostic - the existence of a deity is unknown and unknowable ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnosticism ) skeptic - i doubt there is a deity ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skepticism - see #3)
atheism is simply the assertion of a universal negative. such an assertion is both unproven and unprovable. therefore, atheism is a religion ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion - see #2 and #4). atheism is a religion of blind faith. the sooner mankind learns to accept it, the better off we'll all be.
While I am a Christian and do not accept atheism, agnosticism, or skepticism... I at least have more respect for an agnostic or skeptic. why? they are wise enough not to assert a universal negative, which is logically indefensible. I would still argue that an agnostic's claim can be disproved and that a skeptic's beliefs are unwise, but I can at least respect the wisdom not to make the leap to atheism.
And yes, I realize quite a large number of slashdotters do not believe in God, but before you post "yeah, but prove God exists," or "and do you belief in the tooth fairy, big foot, flying spaghetti monster, etc." please consider my argument. I did not say my post PROVES God exists, only that atheism CANNOT disprove it and is foolish to assert there is no deity. the positive argument/assertion for the existence of God is another post/discussion entirely. this post is merely to point out the fallacy of atheism as a doctrine.
Re:a game that tells the truth about religion
on
Religion in Video Games
·
· Score: 2, Informative
That's not the truth about religion though... that's the truth about fringe elements and people stirred into mob mentality. Every religion or lack thereof has such elements.
If that religion's teachings encourage such rampant violence then such an assessment is fair. But Christianity has no such teachings in the Bible. Killing people for not converting has no part in Christianity. And before someone points to destruction of people in the Promised Land (Old Testament), it is not fair to say they killed all those people and assume the motives were sheer violence, ignorance, bigotry, etc. The reason all those nations were destroyed is rampant disobedience to God and subsequent punishment in the form of the death penalty. Consider that those societies lived in that land for centuries before their destruction. That's a sign of extreme patience against rampant disobedience. So complete destruction of those people was not without merit. A society who has no death penalty or sense of objective morality historically leads to less & less morality and more violence. For a more recent example research the history of Liberal, Missouri.
I agree that killing people for not converting to Christianity is wrong. But, by definition, those who practice such things are not Christians.
Actually admitting that a "green" energy source may not be as green as they thought. Wish more hybrid owners understood that... that battery must be disposed of eventually. As I understand it, hybrids aren't as green as people think. So much of the "green movement" is a total sham b/c it focuses narrowly on supposed benefits while ignoring reality & even data that contradicts the claims made.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm left-handed and I cannot use a mouse with my left hand... You learn to adapt to a right-handed world just like the blind adapt to a sighted world and the deaf adapt to a world full of sound.
Seriously, has anyone personal or enterprise had good experiences with their products?
I'll let you know once Windows finishes loading it and my machine becomes somewhat usable.
I'd say have your wife write an autobiography if she still feels up to it. My grandmother died recently and had a few years before written an autobiography to one of my cousins. My aunt typed up a digital copy for all of us. THAT was a wonderful thing to receive. I knew my grandmother for the last 30 years of her life. But, I had very little idea about the previous 60+ years. I imagine your daughters reading about their mom prior to their birth, or maybe even during the time they were very little too, would be a great memory to have.
Also, the funeral home we have used offers an online area at mem.com for loved ones who have passed. It includes some photos in a video form, some text about the person, a guestbook where friends can write things, etc. It was included in the entire package and is permanent (no monthly or yearly fees).
Why should I care if I get more bang for the buck from going from 10 mpg to 20 mpg vs. going from 33 mpg to 50 mpg? What I care about at the end is how much I'm going to spend going from car #1 to car #2. And, I imagine the vast majority of people care about that.
As long as I can calculate cost per tank on car #1 vs. car #2 then I can plan a budget accordingly. I think most people care more about that.
I care more about the freedom to download the content than the speed. The government having regulatory capabilities in this regard is dangerous. Even having a little is dangerous as the federal government has shown repeatedly that when it gets a little power it always seeks more. Even through various iterations of congress, presidents, court justices, etc. things get bigger and bigger (SS, Medicare, IRS, taxes, it never ends).
I care about letting the free market dictate the speed aspect. Yes, I understand collusion and such, but the free market isn't an immediate fix, it is a consistent fix. Give it time and speeds will increase. How do I know? What percentage of people had no internet access just 20 years ago? How about 10 years ago? What percentage had broadband access 10 years ago? How about now? What was the average broadband rate 10 years ago? How about now? I've had Time Warner in several states and noticed speed ups (not just in different states, but even over time in the same cities).
If you all you care about is speed, that is your choice and I wish you well. But, I'd rather have assurance of the freedom to download said content at all!
Look up the 10th amendment. The DOE has no right to exist. I applaud Texas on a great step forward to teach what has really happened in American history rather than the progressives' revisionist history. And I would agree with other states stepping up to the plate and taking charge of their own education rather than let the DOE do it for them. The federal govt. is already too big.
No I didn't read the article, but my impressions from the summary is just socialist thinking. To reference Europe as a model for America is silly. The problem is not too many graduates, it is too much socialism being perpetuated upon American society. If those in govt. stood back and stopped interfering in free market capitalism then the market would take care of the issue. It might not fix things overnight, but it would ALWAYS fix such things in the long run.
The pope's entire argument is like saying "Guns kill people." Technology is not the problem, only use or misuse of it.
Nah, that's the NULL position. That's where programming languages go to die.
I should spell/grammar check before I submit :-/ ...
Just because that kind of thing can happen regularly in the movies doesn't mean the average individual is in any danger of such a thing.
Not quite, that's a straw-man argument...
Homosexuality is a choice, not biology, regardless of what crank science says. Race is based off biology, not choice, and is readily observed. You cannot equate the two, sorry. Further,
1. "marriage is between a man and a woman" is the firm belief of many people based on religious principles. That is not bigoted regardless of how much some on /. think most/all religious people are blind religious zealots who do not think for themselves and hate others as a result. THAT kind of stereotype is close-minded.
2. "coloreds don't drink from the white fountation" is based off of bigotry. No one chooses their race anymore than someone chooses to be conceived and subsequently born. Such behavior in America's past was shameful.
3. Using #1 as an argument to whether or not two people of the same gender can live together is wrong.
4. Polls show that most people in America believe in #1, so get over it. Just because people believe in #1, doesn't mean they're going to beat down the doors of a homosexual and get violent with them. Nor, does it mean such people will argue against homosexuals carrying life insurance, holding various jobs, etc.
It's the difference between tolerance and acceptance. I can tolerate the RIGHT of a homosexual to CHOOSE how to live THEIR OWN LIFE... That RIGHT to CHOOSE is something they are granted by God. But, that in no way means I have to ACCEPT such choices, just as God does not accept such choices. To force me to accept that is to take away my rights to choose how to live and what to believe.
Not entirely accurate... the federal government FORCED some of these banks to make bad loans that the banks normally would not have done. This falls firmly in the lap of Barney Franks and a few others.
I agree with earlier post that regulation is part of the problem. Yes, some laws need to exist to minimize unethical behavior, most especially when one party is harming another and the harmed party either did not know in advance or was strong-armed into it. Beyond that, the free market system works when the government stays out of the way.
It is truly scary that so many on /. defend government intervention so readily... especially those in the USA. The federal government fails so often and ignores the constitution and bill of rights so often it is ridiculous. I hope soon all 50 states stand up and ram the 10th amendment down the federal government's throat.
a state that every American, with any kind of attention span, knows is broke and needs to CUT spending is creating more financially wasteful bureaucracy. California you truly love to live up to your title as the land of fruits and nuts, don't you?
Then I suggest you research THOROUGHLY which countries have the most advanced technologies, the best medical care/treatments, the best health-insurance coverage, the most prosperous people per capita, the most opportunities for advancement, etc, etc.
Hint: Orange county is a part of the top country for these things. Albeit, many currently in power are trying to ruin it with socialist and communist ideas... a problem to be rectified in November.
Communism is only good on the surface, but fails miserably EVERY time and history shows it.
This comment and the GP are the reason why "We the people" need to start standing up to our government and REMINDING them that they work for us, period! If it is my land and my home, then you (the govt at any level) should have zero say in what I do provided that I'm not committing a violent offense... the ol' "Your rights end where my face begins" kind of thing. Even if the bank owns it, the problem is solely a private matter between me and the bank unless the bank decides to sue.
This kind of nonsense wouldn't even be law if we stood up en masse and said "No more".
I think I like the 861 MPH better... "If my calculations are correct, when this baby gets up to 861 MPH, you're going to see some serious stuff" ... CRASH! KABOOM!
Yes, and Galileo was in the minority once too. What's your point? Science is infallible, scientists are not. It is possible for human passions to mislead people on either side of an argument/debate regardless of how many degrees they have. I am glad there are those here willing to ask, "Do the facts fit global warming/climate change?" instead of "How do the facts fit global warming/climate change?"
Sorry, the majority can, and has many times, been wrong. The skeptics have every right to speak up and it is the duty of scientists to speak up from time to time and question, "Is it so?" instead of "How does this fit with what we already 'know'?" No one doubts, "2 + 2 = 4", but that doesn't apply to every "fact" we think we know.
More and more I'm glad I drive stick... brakes may be electronic, but clutch not engaged == no acceleration.
Bah, that's where capitalism shines... if it's a sink or swim proposition, those who actually care about swimming will adapt. And they will do it without sacrificing real journalism. NYT has been shrinking for a long time while Fox News has record numbers. That's just capitalism working as intended.
Man, I'm so close to owning one... only $4.9999 million short. Can anyone spot me some money?
On that happy note, will you be volunteering for the show?
</kidding>
for those who don't like to copy paste links:
atheism
agnosticism
skepticism
religion
atheism is more than simply lack of belief in a deity. consider some definitions:
atheism - assertion that no deity exists ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheism )
agnostic - the existence of a deity is unknown and unknowable ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnosticism )
skeptic - i doubt there is a deity ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/skepticism - see #3)
therefore, atheism != agnosticism && atheism != skepticism.
atheism is simply the assertion of a universal negative. such an assertion is both unproven and unprovable. therefore, atheism is a religion ( http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion - see #2 and #4). atheism is a religion of blind faith. the sooner mankind learns to accept it, the better off we'll all be.
While I am a Christian and do not accept atheism, agnosticism, or skepticism... I at least have more respect for an agnostic or skeptic. why? they are wise enough not to assert a universal negative, which is logically indefensible. I would still argue that an agnostic's claim can be disproved and that a skeptic's beliefs are unwise, but I can at least respect the wisdom not to make the leap to atheism.
And yes, I realize quite a large number of slashdotters do not believe in God, but before you post "yeah, but prove God exists," or "and do you belief in the tooth fairy, big foot, flying spaghetti monster, etc." please consider my argument. I did not say my post PROVES God exists, only that atheism CANNOT disprove it and is foolish to assert there is no deity. the positive argument/assertion for the existence of God is another post/discussion entirely. this post is merely to point out the fallacy of atheism as a doctrine.
That's not the truth about religion though... that's the truth about fringe elements and people stirred into mob mentality. Every religion or lack thereof has such elements.
If that religion's teachings encourage such rampant violence then such an assessment is fair. But Christianity has no such teachings in the Bible. Killing people for not converting has no part in Christianity. And before someone points to destruction of people in the Promised Land (Old Testament), it is not fair to say they killed all those people and assume the motives were sheer violence, ignorance, bigotry, etc. The reason all those nations were destroyed is rampant disobedience to God and subsequent punishment in the form of the death penalty. Consider that those societies lived in that land for centuries before their destruction. That's a sign of extreme patience against rampant disobedience. So complete destruction of those people was not without merit. A society who has no death penalty or sense of objective morality historically leads to less & less morality and more violence. For a more recent example research the history of Liberal, Missouri.
I agree that killing people for not converting to Christianity is wrong. But, by definition, those who practice such things are not Christians.
</rant>
Actually admitting that a "green" energy source may not be as green as they thought. Wish more hybrid owners understood that... that battery must be disposed of eventually. As I understand it, hybrids aren't as green as people think. So much of the "green movement" is a total sham b/c it focuses narrowly on supposed benefits while ignoring reality & even data that contradicts the claims made.