We have powerful lobbies that think that the government should create tariffs that give them an edge over their competitors. This is not right-wing or left-wing or center-wing. We have that all over. Since free-traders are opposed to these tariffs it's nice to know that you don't conflate "right-wing" with free-trade.
I'm a poster over the 2M UID. For years I ONLY used Anonymous Coward as I'm a privacy geek. I changed when I realized that my entire life is already online: anybody researching me can find out which buildings I bought, which companies I've been an officer in, corporate newsletters in which I've been mentioned (hence knowing where I've worked) and many other things.
So, last year, during the SOPA nonsense I decided to start get another account. (I had an account yrs ago and never used it and didn't have access to the hotmail acct which I used for it.) I'm certain that I'm not the only long term lurker who opens a new Slashdot acct.
Exactly - two people can be pro and con on the same topic and have no worries about being banned. That's the way it should be. I can see being moderated down if you are being insulting ("only a piece of sh*t fool/idiot can be in favor of 'X'") and not providing facts or relevant opinions. But the moderation down should only apply to that particular conversation.
I don't curse and rant and rave anymore, but then I'm passed my script-kiddie phase.:-)
It's even sadder when people who live in those countries with written constitutions don't read them; sadder still when schools don't teach them; sadder still when law schools and talking heads say that the constitution is an archaic document that needs to be updated or supplanted by something else, or argue that the constitution is a "living" document which means that the constitution isn't worth the paper it's written on. READ what Congress is allowed to do. Take a look at the commerce clause - read what it was put in there for.
It's not that lynching is legal again. Stop making things up and scaring yourself and others. There is a law, well meaning as it was, that is throwing a complication into this investigation. Justice is not swift, as anyone who has been involved in the legal system knows. The arresting officer considered it to be a case of negligent homicide. This is not evidence of legal lynching or sweeping things under the table.
Now, even though *I* personally think that the shooting was unjustified (based upon what I've seen and heard so far) the only vigilantism I see is from those who want to "lynch" the shooter: screaming that he's guilty. He may very well be, and I think he is, but he should be tried in court - not in the media.
Stand your ground came into being as a result of someone defending himself from attack while not on his property. The law, as previously understand, mandated that you run from your attackers. So, if you were attacked, and didn't run, you could be prosecuted. If you see your child/wife being attacked and then you attack the attacker YOU are guilty of assault. (True in MA) This law states that you needn't run. And yes f**king complications appear.
Re Social Security - if we were a rational country we would have raised the age from 65 to 67 in the 1970s and then 68 in the 1980s and we wouldn't be having the problems we have now. If we were a rational country we wouldn't be merging two safety nets in one (retirement and disability). If YOU were rational you would be arguing to raise the retirement age. Take a look at demographic data from the 1930s to the present and come up with a better solution before saying that I'm crazy.
Look at these two statements:
1. "most intelligent people from the US know the war is not about terrorism,"
2. "You really think it's all about liberating some poor saps in Afghanistan..."
The war is about terrorism and geopolitical gamemanship.
The portion relating to terrorism can be split into
1. find the f**ks who hit the World Trade Towers
2. don't make the mistake of the 1990s and let a complete power vacume exist in Afghanistan
3. Some people believe in nation-building (I completely disagree)
Connecter btwn terrorism and geopolitics:
1. Some people (Obama) felt this was the right war, that Bush had taken his eye off the prize with Iraq (internal US politics).
Geopolitics
The game of projecting force and influencing friends and enemies namely (Russia, China, Iran). I have no love and much disdain for geopolitics.
You mention it's all about the resources and yet....
When and where did the US get any resources from Iraq and Afghanistan. It hasn't. The same canard was raised about Vietnam - that we were there for the resources. I don't buy this argument that we're there for the resources.
If people are "spending" in your state then that is a good thing isn't it? It's when people are using services and aren't paying for it that's a problem.
so - wouldn't limiting government largess be a solution for limiting corporate influence? Isn't the very idea of government helping via government aide a corrupting influence?
It seems that there are different definitions of "music." I've heard some say that singing is not allowed and yet there is some pretty cool sufi music (for instance Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan). Others differentiate between holy / religious / uplifting singing which brings you closer to god and profane singing.
It will never happen unless both left and right demand it. This is one of those areas that the Tea Party and OWS agree. Other examples include ACTA, SOPA, etc...
This can be pushed. And it can happen.
Exactly - that is one of the many simple ways to change the way Washington/gov't works.
No more "hidden" general fund taxes merged with use taxes (example water bills).
Each bill stands on its own merit.
End of gerrymandering by using towns/neighborhoods as the smallest "building blocks" in composing a congressional district.
What about privacy? Either you have easy to use encryption or you store your own data. I think a lot of people will choose to have their own HDs in addition to any other ease-of-use solution.
Spelling wasn't standardized until the late 17th C/early 18th. One of the most famous jurists of the 17th C, Edward Cooke, spelled "if" different ways in the same paragraph: yf, yffe, iffe, iff. It makes for interestng reading - but you get used to it after a while.
(I was, a lifetime ago, a grad student in history.)
It's not new. Languages (at least European languages) keep roughly 80% of their words over a 1000 yr period. This is true for Latin, French, German, English, etc...
There are numerous textual sources, from Treaties (such as the Treaty of Verdun) to literature to everyday language. The French gave us the words hostel and hotel over a 200 yr period. In that time the French lanugage changed too (adding the circumflex to indicate a "missing" x).
Exactly - get rid of the hidden taxes (like raising general funds from the water and sewage bill) and pull all the general revenue from an income tax.
Here's another - when you have people do something (collect tolls, pick up garbage) pay all the required bills today (ie pay the pension fund today) and don't push off the bill to the next generation of taxpayers.
Look up Human-Computer Interaction. Read the works of
Dan Norman,
Jakob Nielsen
Bruce Tognazzini
and many, many others.
There are numerous opportunities for people whose primary concern is how users interact with computer applications.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank you. Perfectly stated.
We have powerful lobbies that think that the government should create tariffs that give them an edge over their competitors. This is not right-wing or left-wing or center-wing. We have that all over. Since free-traders are opposed to these tariffs it's nice to know that you don't conflate "right-wing" with free-trade.
I'm a poster over the 2M UID. For years I ONLY used Anonymous Coward as I'm a privacy geek. I changed when I realized that my entire life is already online: anybody researching me can find out which buildings I bought, which companies I've been an officer in, corporate newsletters in which I've been mentioned (hence knowing where I've worked) and many other things.
So, last year, during the SOPA nonsense I decided to start get another account. (I had an account yrs ago and never used it and didn't have access to the hotmail acct which I used for it.) I'm certain that I'm not the only long term lurker who opens a new Slashdot acct.
Exactly - two people can be pro and con on the same topic and have no worries about being banned. That's the way it should be. I can see being moderated down if you are being insulting ("only a piece of sh*t fool/idiot can be in favor of 'X'") and not providing facts or relevant opinions. But the moderation down should only apply to that particular conversation. I don't curse and rant and rave anymore, but then I'm passed my script-kiddie phase. :-)
Couldn't agree more with everything arth1 said. More than anything else - get rid of the "share" icons.
It's even sadder when people who live in those countries with written constitutions don't read them; sadder still when schools don't teach them; sadder still when law schools and talking heads say that the constitution is an archaic document that needs to be updated or supplanted by something else, or argue that the constitution is a "living" document which means that the constitution isn't worth the paper it's written on. READ what Congress is allowed to do. Take a look at the commerce clause - read what it was put in there for.
It's not that lynching is legal again. Stop making things up and scaring yourself and others. There is a law, well meaning as it was, that is throwing a complication into this investigation. Justice is not swift, as anyone who has been involved in the legal system knows. The arresting officer considered it to be a case of negligent homicide. This is not evidence of legal lynching or sweeping things under the table. Now, even though *I* personally think that the shooting was unjustified (based upon what I've seen and heard so far) the only vigilantism I see is from those who want to "lynch" the shooter: screaming that he's guilty. He may very well be, and I think he is, but he should be tried in court - not in the media. Stand your ground came into being as a result of someone defending himself from attack while not on his property. The law, as previously understand, mandated that you run from your attackers. So, if you were attacked, and didn't run, you could be prosecuted. If you see your child/wife being attacked and then you attack the attacker YOU are guilty of assault. (True in MA) This law states that you needn't run. And yes f**king complications appear. Re Social Security - if we were a rational country we would have raised the age from 65 to 67 in the 1970s and then 68 in the 1980s and we wouldn't be having the problems we have now. If we were a rational country we wouldn't be merging two safety nets in one (retirement and disability). If YOU were rational you would be arguing to raise the retirement age. Take a look at demographic data from the 1930s to the present and come up with a better solution before saying that I'm crazy.
Look at these two statements: ..."
....
When and where did the US get any resources from Iraq and Afghanistan. It hasn't. The same canard was raised about Vietnam - that we were there for the resources. I don't buy this argument that we're there for the resources.
1. "most intelligent people from the US know the war is not about terrorism,"
2. "You really think it's all about liberating some poor saps in Afghanistan
The war is about terrorism and geopolitical gamemanship.
The portion relating to terrorism can be split into
1. find the f**ks who hit the World Trade Towers
2. don't make the mistake of the 1990s and let a complete power vacume exist in Afghanistan
3. Some people believe in nation-building (I completely disagree)
Connecter btwn terrorism and geopolitics:
1. Some people (Obama) felt this was the right war, that Bush had taken his eye off the prize with Iraq (internal US politics).
Geopolitics
The game of projecting force and influencing friends and enemies namely (Russia, China, Iran). I have no love and much disdain for geopolitics.
You mention it's all about the resources and yet
I must be a redneck moron then.
If people are "spending" in your state then that is a good thing isn't it? It's when people are using services and aren't paying for it that's a problem.
I remember my first 20MB harddrive. It cost over $200. (This was in the late 80s).
so - wouldn't limiting government largess be a solution for limiting corporate influence? Isn't the very idea of government helping via government aide a corrupting influence?
We might not be in the world of Total Recall but we're getting there. Researchers have been able to "read" thoughts (see: http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/02/15/2143208/brain-implants-can-detect-what-patients-hear) and now this. Who says you need magic to store memories in a penseive? We're going to be there faster that you think.
It seems that there are different definitions of "music." I've heard some say that singing is not allowed and yet there is some pretty cool sufi music (for instance Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan). Others differentiate between holy / religious / uplifting singing which brings you closer to god and profane singing.
I thought it was the ACME Company's patent.
It will never happen unless both left and right demand it. This is one of those areas that the Tea Party and OWS agree. Other examples include ACTA, SOPA, etc... This can be pushed. And it can happen.
Exactly - that is one of the many simple ways to change the way Washington/gov't works. No more "hidden" general fund taxes merged with use taxes (example water bills). Each bill stands on its own merit. End of gerrymandering by using towns/neighborhoods as the smallest "building blocks" in composing a congressional district.
What about privacy? Either you have easy to use encryption or you store your own data. I think a lot of people will choose to have their own HDs in addition to any other ease-of-use solution.
Spelling wasn't standardized until the late 17th C/early 18th. One of the most famous jurists of the 17th C, Edward Cooke, spelled "if" different ways in the same paragraph: yf, yffe, iffe, iff. It makes for interestng reading - but you get used to it after a while. (I was, a lifetime ago, a grad student in history.)
Commenting on your sig: knowledge is potential power. You still have to do something with your knowledge.
It's not new. Languages (at least European languages) keep roughly 80% of their words over a 1000 yr period. This is true for Latin, French, German, English, etc... There are numerous textual sources, from Treaties (such as the Treaty of Verdun) to literature to everyday language. The French gave us the words hostel and hotel over a 200 yr period. In that time the French lanugage changed too (adding the circumflex to indicate a "missing" x).
Oops. Yes Donald Norman. (I don't know what his middle name is.)
Very well said - but then they will argue that this music is a "service" and services can be taxed just as easily as a product.
Exactly - get rid of the hidden taxes (like raising general funds from the water and sewage bill) and pull all the general revenue from an income tax. Here's another - when you have people do something (collect tolls, pick up garbage) pay all the required bills today (ie pay the pension fund today) and don't push off the bill to the next generation of taxpayers.
Look up Human-Computer Interaction. Read the works of Dan Norman, Jakob Nielsen Bruce Tognazzini and many, many others. There are numerous opportunities for people whose primary concern is how users interact with computer applications.