However, restricting one group and giving unearned consideration to another group because the first group has "historical privilege" isn't just or fair.
I have no idea, I haven't used it in ages. I just suggested it because it's the standard suggestion for PDF on Windows in place of Adobe's reader and all its malware.
So I guess if you want to work with PDFs in Windows, you're just stuck with malware.
Oh well, that doesn't bother me anyway. Yet another reason I'm happy to be a Linux user.
And I've gotta say I don't think I've ever seen a church congregation with more men than women.
I've heard that stereotype before too. I've even heard country songs with women saying something about how they need to "drag" their men to church. I've also heard of women in church having a hard time finding husbands, exacerbated by the preachers telling them they cannot date men who don't also go to church (that's being "unequally yoked"). So it does seem like women are more religious in general than men. However, I find it interesting that almost all religious leaders are men. Hmmm...
No, it sounds like you've never been to southern California. I've been to San Diego lots of times, including the La Jolla area, Encinitas, Escondido, Carlsbad, and the LA area including the Irvine area. I've also been to Baja Mexico, including Tijuana and Ensanada. The two places couldn't be any more different.
Oh please. Yes, Germany (and in fact most European nations) is not that old as far as a unified nation-state. Before the late 1800s, it was a collection of duchies or whatever. Much of Europe was like that. However, even if it wasn't politically united, it was culturally and linguistically united, and that was my whole point: East and West Germany in 1991 were linguistically almost the same (West had more English/American influences, East had more Russian influences), and were culturally still very close. Mexico and the US are simply not like this at all.
You are correct that East Germany could have stayed independent, though IIRC at the time the EU did not really exist as it does now. However Germans have definitely had a sense of national unity for a long time; what do you think drove all their nationalism in WWII? But Austria and Germany aren't that culturally different either, and pretty much share the same language, but they're independent nations.
You may not need the Republicans, but *we* need you guys to reduce the Republican voters to a small minority of the overall voting population.
Or, we could have a compromise: let's break apart the US, let the South and Texas be independent, and the rest of the US merges with Canada. Maybe Mexico will try to annex the South after that.
From what I can tell, the vast majority of 20-somethings in the US are *not* SJW types. They seem to be a very, very small but extremely vocal minority to me.
They also don't seem to have a whole lot of money, as they don't work in any kind of high-paying profession. Being a barista is not "having money".
If it's a tiny minority of jackasses, you would be correct.
When it's the vast majority, however, then creating standards is useless. You need a way to *enforce* standards compliance, and Microsoft will never do that because ISVs are the whole reason Windows is dominant.
Not exactly bad, rather something which is wimpy, weak, overly-emotional and easily swayed by non-rational actions.
I always hear this allegation that women are "less rational" than men, but notice that almost all preachers and religious leaders are men. So are the vast majority of Republican politicians, who rile up their constituents with emotional and irrational claims to make them afraid.
Just look at East Germany: the western side is still pouring money into reunification, and that's with a country that used to be part of them, where the culture is similar and the language is the same.
This guy wants to annex a country with an entirely alien culture, an entirely different language, and all kinds of social problems?
What actual power do SJWs have? Are they proposing legislation in the US Congress? Or are they just a bunch of underemployed 20-something hipsters yakking online?
This guy is a senator for a populous nation, so he has actual power, and there's a possibility his legislation could actually get passed.
Linux doesn't have the problem, or at least, not quite in the same way.
First off, I don't know *any* Linux distro that's going to push a changed UI or dropped features or anything like that on you with a security update. Where you see that is in major version changes. They don't have the evil desire to push unwanted "features" on you for profit like proprietary companies do, so there's no need to sneak things in like the proprietary software companies do with updates.
Now they certainly do have a record of changing the UI, frequently for the worse (Gnome3 is a prime example). But the answer here is pretty simple: since they only do this with major version changes, simply don't use that version! With the LTS versions that many distros offer, you can stick with a stable software platform for a long time, and take your time in determining what to upgrade to from there. Try out the newer versions before you commit to them. And when they do go to crap like Gnome3 or Unity, you have choice: you can install a different desktop environment, or even switch to an alternative distro like Mint (where an alternative DE is better-supported and integrated). This is what's so nice about Linux: there's lots of competing distros, with different strengths and weaknesses and focuses. If one distro decides to try to force a crappy UI on you that shows you search results from Amazon, you can switch to a different distro that doesn't do that. The problem with proprietary software is that there is no choice: it's their way or the highway.
This is what happens when the average age at these big tech companies these days is under 30. These 20-something hipsters have no idea how to make software that actually works.
It's not just Google, every big company is like this.
If the retards at Microsoft had their way, everyone would have a Windows Phone, own a Surface Pro, use a PC with Windows 10 and use Metro apps all day long with a touchscreen and get gorilla arm and need physical therapy on a regular basis for it, and would have invasive background check processes running all the time, which would never be turned off, and they'd be using Windows' built-in keylogging spyware.
If the retards at Apple had their way, everyone would have an iPhone, own an iPad 2/3/4/5/6/etc., use an iMac or MacBook, would use iTunes and have all their CPU time hogged by that bloated monstrosity, and would be paying half their income for these privileges.
Even if they did make such a system, I'll bet many of these software vendors wouldn't bother to use it and would instead want to push their own spyware-laden updater.
Yeah, I tried that when I was much younger. Now I know a lot better, so I keep my music and opinions to myself, unless I'm in a semi-anonymous forum online with at least some like-minded people.
And it's not just assholism; it's usually a lot easier to take than to give, so not that many people give, and with taking you get something you want quickly, whereas with giving you're hoping it comes around to you later, unless you're one of those really generous sorts that just loves giving.
I do agree that people are keeping their cars longer than ever now, however your idea about stealerships is incorrect I think. They make *more* profit off used cars than they do new cars. New cars really don't do much for them; they make all their money on either used-car sales, or on service, accessories, etc. New cars are like gasoline: there's no profit in it, it's just a way to get you in the door so they can money on you with other stuff.
No, they don't. First, the OP specifically said he used an iPad. And second, the e-ink ereaders are going the way of the Dodo; everyone's just using iPads and Android tablets for e-reading now.
Or you can be a dick, not lend anything out, and not enrich the lives of those around you. Just remember, what goes around comes around.
What if those around you have zero interest in the things you have to lend (whether it's music, books, etc.), because their tastes are all completely different?
It goes both ways too - your friends lend stuff to you.
What if they don't? What if you don't want to borrow any of their crap, so it ends up being a one-sided relationship?
In my experience, things like this which people assume should be equitable and balanced, rarely are. Instead a few people end up being the "givers" and everyone else is a moocher.
Yeah, and then you get the annoyance and eyestrain that comes from reading a backlit screen for too long. And you can't read a backlit screen on the beach in the bright summer daylight either.
Slashdot Mirror
Justice and fairness are great things.
However, restricting one group and giving unearned consideration to another group because the first group has "historical privilege" isn't just or fair.
I have no idea, I haven't used it in ages. I just suggested it because it's the standard suggestion for PDF on Windows in place of Adobe's reader and all its malware.
So I guess if you want to work with PDFs in Windows, you're just stuck with malware.
Oh well, that doesn't bother me anyway. Yet another reason I'm happy to be a Linux user.
And I've gotta say I don't think I've ever seen a church congregation with more men than women.
I've heard that stereotype before too. I've even heard country songs with women saying something about how they need to "drag" their men to church. I've also heard of women in church having a hard time finding husbands, exacerbated by the preachers telling them they cannot date men who don't also go to church (that's being "unequally yoked"). So it does seem like women are more religious in general than men. However, I find it interesting that almost all religious leaders are men. Hmmm...
No, it sounds like you've never been to southern California. I've been to San Diego lots of times, including the La Jolla area, Encinitas, Escondido, Carlsbad, and the LA area including the Irvine area. I've also been to Baja Mexico, including Tijuana and Ensanada. The two places couldn't be any more different.
Oh please. Yes, Germany (and in fact most European nations) is not that old as far as a unified nation-state. Before the late 1800s, it was a collection of duchies or whatever. Much of Europe was like that. However, even if it wasn't politically united, it was culturally and linguistically united, and that was my whole point: East and West Germany in 1991 were linguistically almost the same (West had more English/American influences, East had more Russian influences), and were culturally still very close. Mexico and the US are simply not like this at all.
You are correct that East Germany could have stayed independent, though IIRC at the time the EU did not really exist as it does now. However Germans have definitely had a sense of national unity for a long time; what do you think drove all their nationalism in WWII? But Austria and Germany aren't that culturally different either, and pretty much share the same language, but they're independent nations.
You may not need the Republicans, but *we* need you guys to reduce the Republican voters to a small minority of the overall voting population.
Or, we could have a compromise: let's break apart the US, let the South and Texas be independent, and the rest of the US merges with Canada. Maybe Mexico will try to annex the South after that.
From what I can tell, the vast majority of 20-somethings in the US are *not* SJW types. They seem to be a very, very small but extremely vocal minority to me.
They also don't seem to have a whole lot of money, as they don't work in any kind of high-paying profession. Being a barista is not "having money".
If it's a tiny minority of jackasses, you would be correct.
When it's the vast majority, however, then creating standards is useless. You need a way to *enforce* standards compliance, and Microsoft will never do that because ISVs are the whole reason Windows is dominant.
Not exactly bad, rather something which is wimpy, weak, overly-emotional and easily swayed by non-rational actions.
I always hear this allegation that women are "less rational" than men, but notice that almost all preachers and religious leaders are men. So are the vast majority of Republican politicians, who rile up their constituents with emotional and irrational claims to make them afraid.
Just look at East Germany: the western side is still pouring money into reunification, and that's with a country that used to be part of them, where the culture is similar and the language is the same.
This guy wants to annex a country with an entirely alien culture, an entirely different language, and all kinds of social problems?
What actual power do SJWs have? Are they proposing legislation in the US Congress? Or are they just a bunch of underemployed 20-something hipsters yakking online?
This guy is a senator for a populous nation, so he has actual power, and there's a possibility his legislation could actually get passed.
Linux doesn't have the problem, or at least, not quite in the same way.
First off, I don't know *any* Linux distro that's going to push a changed UI or dropped features or anything like that on you with a security update. Where you see that is in major version changes. They don't have the evil desire to push unwanted "features" on you for profit like proprietary companies do, so there's no need to sneak things in like the proprietary software companies do with updates.
Now they certainly do have a record of changing the UI, frequently for the worse (Gnome3 is a prime example). But the answer here is pretty simple: since they only do this with major version changes, simply don't use that version! With the LTS versions that many distros offer, you can stick with a stable software platform for a long time, and take your time in determining what to upgrade to from there. Try out the newer versions before you commit to them. And when they do go to crap like Gnome3 or Unity, you have choice: you can install a different desktop environment, or even switch to an alternative distro like Mint (where an alternative DE is better-supported and integrated). This is what's so nice about Linux: there's lots of competing distros, with different strengths and weaknesses and focuses. If one distro decides to try to force a crappy UI on you that shows you search results from Amazon, you can switch to a different distro that doesn't do that. The problem with proprietary software is that there is no choice: it's their way or the highway.
You should use FoxIt instead. The Adobe reader is a bloated POS, and you only need it if you're using some pretty specific features.
What kind of piece-of-shit access point doesn't have a web interface? WTF?
Why would you even buy something like that?
This is what happens when the average age at these big tech companies these days is under 30. These 20-something hipsters have no idea how to make software that actually works.
It's not just Google, every big company is like this.
If the retards at Microsoft had their way, everyone would have a Windows Phone, own a Surface Pro, use a PC with Windows 10 and use Metro apps all day long with a touchscreen and get gorilla arm and need physical therapy on a regular basis for it, and would have invasive background check processes running all the time, which would never be turned off, and they'd be using Windows' built-in keylogging spyware.
If the retards at Apple had their way, everyone would have an iPhone, own an iPad 2/3/4/5/6/etc., use an iMac or MacBook, would use iTunes and have all their CPU time hogged by that bloated monstrosity, and would be paying half their income for these privileges.
Even if they did make such a system, I'll bet many of these software vendors wouldn't bother to use it and would instead want to push their own spyware-laden updater.
That's not quite true; when no one wants to hear any music you like or talk about stuff that interests you, it gets rather lonely.
Yeah, I tried that when I was much younger. Now I know a lot better, so I keep my music and opinions to myself, unless I'm in a semi-anonymous forum online with at least some like-minded people.
Exactly, it's like this for everything.
And it's not just assholism; it's usually a lot easier to take than to give, so not that many people give, and with taking you get something you want quickly, whereas with giving you're hoping it comes around to you later, unless you're one of those really generous sorts that just loves giving.
I do agree that people are keeping their cars longer than ever now, however your idea about stealerships is incorrect I think. They make *more* profit off used cars than they do new cars. New cars really don't do much for them; they make all their money on either used-car sales, or on service, accessories, etc. New cars are like gasoline: there's no profit in it, it's just a way to get you in the door so they can money on you with other stuff.
No, they don't. First, the OP specifically said he used an iPad. And second, the e-ink ereaders are going the way of the Dodo; everyone's just using iPads and Android tablets for e-reading now.
Or you can be a dick, not lend anything out, and not enrich the lives of those around you. Just remember, what goes around comes around.
What if those around you have zero interest in the things you have to lend (whether it's music, books, etc.), because their tastes are all completely different?
It goes both ways too - your friends lend stuff to you.
What if they don't? What if you don't want to borrow any of their crap, so it ends up being a one-sided relationship?
In my experience, things like this which people assume should be equitable and balanced, rarely are. Instead a few people end up being the "givers" and everyone else is a moocher.
Yeah, and then you get the annoyance and eyestrain that comes from reading a backlit screen for too long. And you can't read a backlit screen on the beach in the bright summer daylight either.