having a solar laser of incredible power strafing across the landscape.
For those who watch Enterprise, this is inevitable, as the Xindi want to wipe us out.
The question is, wouldn't an advanced culture, 100's of years in the future, be able to deliver a massive-yield nuclear weapon, rather than strafing the Earth with some laser weapon?
that allowing or condoning prison-rape only reinforces the might-makes-right, sociopathic behavior of violent criminals. Essentially, the bigger, stronger, more antisocial and more violent a criminal is in prison, the more status that person has in the strata of prison life. Quite a lesson for those who will be released from maximum-security prisons, as most inmates eventually will be, maybe into your neighborhood.
I've seen studies in some prisons that show that increased monitoring and enforcement of pro-social behavior not only makes for better parolees, but actually makes the incarceration of the baddest of the bad more miserable. In other words, in a world where the wolves are forced to act like humans, they are most unhappy.
And yes, the people being prison-raped are not the people who, in the words of the parent poster, "deserve it."
I am far from some lefty, as my previous posts will attest. But I think capital punishment, with proper due process, done in a humane way, is a lot more civilized that condoning rape of inmates.
A modern, civilized society should not condone such behavior. Certainly not by people who profess to believe in the Constitution.
Hard disk and microprocessor high-power microwave (HPM) weapons shielding device. A lead protective cover surrounds electronic computer components which are susceptible to HPM damage.
Amazing how you were able to make a judgement on my field of study and understanding of statistics, based on zero evidence. I was obviously defending myself from the poster - who was making a subtle ad hominem attack on me - not an inductive conclusion on Fox viewership based on my own education.
Judge [sic] by your inability to understand statistics, I'm guess [sic] it's in a field that doesn't involve any actual maths [sic] or science.
Judging by your illiteracy, I'm guessing English isn't your field of study.
I was responding to this policy statement by the ACLU, a sub-topic:
The Union agrees with the Supreme Court's longstanding interpretation of the Second Amendment that the individual's right to keep and bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a 'well-regulated militia'. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected.
Not "Let's explain why the ACLU won't get invloved [sic] in this."
I am well aware that for the Constitution to apply, (with one notable exception) state action is required.
First off, I am a lawyer, so I am well aware of the law involved, and that the Constitution only applies to governmental actors. Of course, the ACLU does get involved in a lot of private conduct, and much of civil rights law pertains to non-governmental action. And the ACLU litigates matters way beyond the scope of what most would define as "liberties."
But I don't recall ever suggesting that the ACLU should get involved. The thread was discussing the ACLU's inconsistency WRT the Second Amendment. I didn't start the thread; I just commented on it.
Of course, you never address the merits of what I wrote. Maybe next time you'll read through the thread before flaming.
This inconsistent stand proves the ACLU uses the Constitution as a means (for its lib agenda), rather than an end.
Today, most constitutional scholars believe that the Second Amendment does protect individual RTBA. But that's debatable.
What's not debatable is that the ACLU fights for ludicrous, extreme interpretations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, yet suddenly is a textualist on the Second.
The ACLU should make its motto:
The ACLU, where the Constitution is a means, not an end.
Obviously America is not a direct democracy. I am well aware of the framers' intent to avoid direct democracy and the Madisonian "tyranny of the majority."
But America has aspects of both democracy and republic, so it is both or neither. Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law
See: State initiative process, Arnold, the fact that we vote for national representatives.
A democratic republic (or representative democracy) is technically an elected, representative government based on consent of the governed. The US has a democratic republic, since we choose our leaders by voting (yes, I know about the electoral college - see below). The United Kingdon is a republic - a monarchial republic. China is a socialist republic, based on a dictatorship.
So not all republics are democracies, but some are, at least partially.
Your post is off-topic though, since I never said that America is a democracy. I said libs were against democracy.
I say this because they have a very small plurality. Quite simply, their ideas would never survive popular referendum. Thus, the left opposes nearly every ballot initiative, and constantly tries to thwart the will of the people in court, with lib judges (see: ACLU).
or Bezos' excuse-making for mounting losses? Seems like that non-profit "business plan" was announced by Bezos about 2-3 years after Amazon went public!
Now, I don't have an MBA, but I recall from undergrad business that business plans are generally written and implemented before one goes public.;-)
Regardless, you unintentionally prove my point: As an investor, I'll take a for-profit business model like eBay's over the infate-you-stock-price-regardless-of-earnings model that caused the dot-com crash!
[Ailes] was put in charge of the news operation for the sole purpose of slanting the news to the extreme right.
Extreme right, like Nazi Germany? Please. That's what we regularly see Susan Estrich, Davis Korn, Paul Krugman, and scores of other libs on FNC?
What notable conservatives are on CNN, except anti-war paleocon Bob Novak? How about ABC, whose only foriegn policy "experts" are from the Carter or Clinton administration, or from the leftie Brookings Institution?
Nice link to the far-left Salon.com, BTW. Nice story, which calls ABC "objective." In a recent poll, Peter Jennings was called the most anti-war reporter in all of American news.
The problem is that its core democratic of poor middle aged southern white racist men do not have much in the way of buying power. Advertisers much prefer to reach 18-35 audiences, gays, professionals, etc. in short pretty much everyone who is unlikely to watch Fox. In fact advertising on Fox News actually trades at a discount to other broadcasts reaching the same demographic because advertisers know that many of the demographics they do want are actually less likely to buy a product they see advertised on a channel they associate with biggotry.
You fail to provide a link to this claim of FNC's core demo, because it has no basis in fact. Why does FNC constantly run endless home refi adds? For all those poor southerners to refi their trailers? LOL! First time I've ever heard libs call Republicans "poor!" Hilarious. I thought we were rich guys who wanted tax cuts?
You are flat-out wrong. The FNC demo is better than CNN's; it is popular with young republican YUPPIEs. Newscorp is kicking a$$, and CNN is in the dumper financially, in case you haven't checked recently, if ever.
Although a typical liberal refrain is labeling conservatives "bigots" (although they often misspell it), it's an insulting, inaccurate troll, and your post should be rated as such.
You libs are only about 17-20% of the population, compared to about 34% conservative and the rest moderate (see Gallup - sorry, but their older polls require subscription).
Fox news will flip flop to the left.
Sorry, that (19%) demo is already filled by CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, AP, Reuters, NPR...not enough libs left to go around, LOL!
eBay has been a resounding financial success from day one, just incredible. You can't say that about Amazon, whose foray into profitability is somewhat recent, and nowhere near eBay's margins.
Whether Gates is a security expert isn't the point. It's news because he is founder, face, chief executive, majority stockholder, and policy maker of the largest OS developer in the world.
If the GM CEO said "we don't need to make safe cars, just safer drivers and roads" not only would it be newsworthy, but the sales and sock would be hurt, and it might be a breach of fiduciary duty to the corporation.
Gates might not code (anymore), but he is Grand Poobah, and he sets policy. What he says, goes, and all security coding monkeys follow suit.
The original story was very relevant and newsworthy, and not just due to/.'s anti-MS bias.
I almost included this in my original post, knowing with absolute certainty that some leftie elitist would chime in about how dumb people are. So here goes.
You lefties are all for constitutional democracy, except for the democracy part.
According to Gallup, a majority of Americans believe the federal government exerts either the right amount of power or not enough power. It's over 70% total.
It seems, thankfully, most people would prefer the government actualy do something about terror, rather than complaining about being watched while surfing the Net in libraries, before the next 9-11 happens.
But the First protects stripping and flag-burning, at least according to the ACLU, which takes the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth to ridiculous extremes, but suddenly gets all original intent and textualist on us when it comes to RTBA. I smell an agenda, not a protector of liberties.
Yeah, the states demanded a Bill of Rights to ensure that the government's powers were protected!
The ACLU, for whom the Constitution is a means, not an end.
I think this Broadband Reports article also brings up a good point: among the groups attacking the Act, why do so few of them bring up Echelon?
Because Echelon pre-dates the Patriot Act by many years? Because the two are not tied together in any way? Because Echelon network is mostly in foreign countries (I have never seen any verifiable proof that Echelon hardware is in US), and therefore cannot be used to intercept strictly domestic US communications (as Patriot can)? From your link,
However, the exact capabilities and goals of ECHELON remain unclear. For example, it is unknown whether ECHELON actually targets domestic communications. Also, it is apparently very difficult for ECHELON to intercept certain types of transmissions, particularly fiber communications.
Slashdot Mirror
Apple hates bad PR. Once all the Mac sites pick this up, the pressure will mount and Apple will likely release a fix.
I think I saw something on /. recently about a sense of humor transplant. Consider it.
having a solar laser of incredible power strafing across the landscape.
For those who watch Enterprise, this is inevitable, as the Xindi want to wipe us out.
The question is, wouldn't an advanced culture, 100's of years in the future, be able to deliver a massive-yield nuclear weapon, rather than strafing the Earth with some laser weapon?
that allowing or condoning prison-rape only reinforces the might-makes-right, sociopathic behavior of violent criminals. Essentially, the bigger, stronger, more antisocial and more violent a criminal is in prison, the more status that person has in the strata of prison life. Quite a lesson for those who will be released from maximum-security prisons, as most inmates eventually will be, maybe into your neighborhood.
I've seen studies in some prisons that show that increased monitoring and enforcement of pro-social behavior not only makes for better parolees, but actually makes the incarceration of the baddest of the bad more miserable. In other words, in a world where the wolves are forced to act like humans, they are most unhappy.
And yes, the people being prison-raped are not the people who, in the words of the parent poster, "deserve it."
I am far from some lefty, as my previous posts will attest. But I think capital punishment, with proper due process, done in a humane way, is a lot more civilized that condoning rape of inmates.
A modern, civilized society should not condone such behavior. Certainly not by people who profess to believe in the Constitution.
In a wheelchair...
Patent (A) 7637487234023407278462837:
Hard disk and microprocessor high-power microwave (HPM) weapons shielding device. A lead protective cover surrounds electronic computer components which are susceptible to HPM damage.
Amazing how you were able to make a judgement on my field of study and understanding of statistics, based on zero evidence. I was obviously defending myself from the poster - who was making a subtle ad hominem attack on me - not an inductive conclusion on Fox viewership based on my own education.
Judge [sic] by your inability to understand statistics, I'm guess [sic] it's in a field that doesn't involve any actual maths [sic] or science.
Judging by your illiteracy, I'm guessing English isn't your field of study.
I was responding to this policy statement by the ACLU, a sub-topic:
The Union agrees with the Supreme Court's longstanding interpretation of the Second Amendment that the individual's right to keep and bear arms applies only to the preservation or efficiency of a 'well-regulated militia'. Except for lawful police and military purposes, the possession of weapons by individuals is not constitutionally protected.
Not "Let's explain why the ACLU won't get invloved [sic] in this."
I am well aware that for the Constitution to apply, (with one notable exception) state action is required.
First off, I am a lawyer, so I am well aware of the law involved, and that the Constitution only applies to governmental actors. Of course, the ACLU does get involved in a lot of private conduct, and much of civil rights law pertains to non-governmental action. And the ACLU litigates matters way beyond the scope of what most would define as "liberties."
But I don't recall ever suggesting that the ACLU should get involved. The thread was discussing the ACLU's inconsistency WRT the Second Amendment. I didn't start the thread; I just commented on it.
Of course, you never address the merits of what I wrote. Maybe next time you'll read through the thread before flaming.
Idiot.
Jesus H, all that money spend on law school, why didn't I think of this???
This inconsistent stand proves the ACLU uses the Constitution as a means (for its lib agenda), rather than an end.
Today, most constitutional scholars believe that the Second Amendment does protect individual RTBA. But that's debatable.
What's not debatable is that the ACLU fights for ludicrous, extreme interpretations of the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments, yet suddenly is a textualist on the Second.
The ACLU should make its motto:
The ACLU, where the Constitution is a means, not an end.
OK Dr. Science,
Please post a link to a study or poll proving your thesis that viewership of Fox is inversely correlated with education and income.
Otherwise, let's discontinue this as yet another unsubstantiated leftist slander of the right.
Hey amateur political scientist,
Obviously America is not a direct democracy. I am well aware of the framers' intent to avoid direct democracy and the Madisonian "tyranny of the majority."
But America has aspects of both democracy and republic, so it is both or neither. Republican under Common Law, and democratic under statutory law
See: State initiative process, Arnold, the fact that we vote for national representatives.
A democratic republic (or representative democracy) is technically an elected, representative government based on consent of the governed. The US has a democratic republic, since we choose our leaders by voting (yes, I know about the electoral college - see below). The United Kingdon is a republic - a monarchial republic. China is a socialist republic, based on a dictatorship.
So not all republics are democracies, but some are, at least partially.
Your post is off-topic though, since I never said that America is a democracy. I said libs were against democracy.
I say this because they have a very small plurality. Quite simply, their ideas would never survive popular referendum. Thus, the left opposes nearly every ballot initiative, and constantly tries to thwart the will of the people in court, with lib judges (see: ACLU).
Unassimilatible
BA, Political Science
JD, Law
Proof that viewership of Fox is inversely correlated with education and income.
On a personal note, I have a doctorate.
You?
or Bezos' excuse-making for mounting losses? Seems like that non-profit "business plan" was announced by Bezos about 2-3 years after Amazon went public!
;-)
Now, I don't have an MBA, but I recall from undergrad business that business plans are generally written and implemented before one goes public.
Regardless, you unintentionally prove my point: As an investor, I'll take a for-profit business model like eBay's over the infate-you-stock-price-regardless-of-earnings model that caused the dot-com crash!
This is a bad thing since experience working at Fox news does not exactly enhance your resume when applying for a job with the real media
So much for this theory:
Miller hired by CNBC
[Ailes] was put in charge of the news operation for the sole purpose of slanting the news to the extreme right.
Extreme right, like Nazi Germany? Please. That's what we regularly see Susan Estrich, Davis Korn, Paul Krugman, and scores of other libs on FNC?
What notable conservatives are on CNN, except anti-war paleocon Bob Novak? How about ABC, whose only foriegn policy "experts" are from the Carter or Clinton administration, or from the leftie Brookings Institution?
Nice link to the far-left Salon.com, BTW. Nice story, which calls ABC "objective." In a recent poll, Peter Jennings was called the most anti-war reporter in all of American news.
ABC News admits to excessively negative Iraq coverage
The problem is that its core democratic of poor middle aged southern white racist men do not have much in the way of buying power. Advertisers much prefer to reach 18-35 audiences, gays, professionals, etc. in short pretty much everyone who is unlikely to watch Fox. In fact advertising on Fox News actually trades at a discount to other broadcasts reaching the same demographic because advertisers know that many of the demographics they do want are actually less likely to buy a product they see advertised on a channel they associate with biggotry.
You fail to provide a link to this claim of FNC's core demo, because it has no basis in fact. Why does FNC constantly run endless home refi adds? For all those poor southerners to refi their trailers? LOL! First time I've ever heard libs call Republicans "poor!" Hilarious. I thought we were rich guys who wanted tax cuts?
You are flat-out wrong. The FNC demo is better than CNN's; it is popular with young republican YUPPIEs. Newscorp is kicking a$$, and CNN is in the dumper financially, in case you haven't checked recently, if ever.
Although a typical liberal refrain is labeling conservatives "bigots" (although they often misspell it), it's an insulting, inaccurate troll, and your post should be rated as such.
You libs are only about 17-20% of the population, compared to about 34% conservative and the rest moderate (see Gallup - sorry, but their older polls require subscription).
Fox news will flip flop to the left.
Sorry, that (19%) demo is already filled by CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, AP, Reuters, NPR...not enough libs left to go around, LOL!
is it going to be the next eBay or Amazon
eBay has been a resounding financial success from day one, just incredible. You can't say that about Amazon, whose foray into profitability is somewhat recent, and nowhere near eBay's margins.
become IPO billionaires, so I doubt your quaint notion of mom-and-pop will sway them!
What, you thought they were doing this for altruistic reasons? Welcome to capitalism.
Whether Gates is a security expert isn't the point. It's news because he is founder, face, chief executive, majority stockholder, and policy maker of the largest OS developer in the world.
/.'s anti-MS bias.
If the GM CEO said "we don't need to make safe cars, just safer drivers and roads" not only would it be newsworthy, but the sales and sock would be hurt, and it might be a breach of fiduciary duty to the corporation.
Gates might not code (anymore), but he is Grand Poobah, and he sets policy. What he says, goes, and all security coding monkeys follow suit.
The original story was very relevant and newsworthy, and not just due to
I'll assume MS will have an acceptable use policy, which will include not posting purchased Mac photos?
I almost included this in my original post, knowing with absolute certainty that some leftie elitist would chime in about how dumb people are. So here goes.
You lefties are all for constitutional democracy, except for the democracy part.
Maybe you should move?
According to Gallup, a majority of Americans believe the federal government exerts either the right amount of power or not enough power. It's over 70% total.
Most Americans Don't Feel Government Threatens Civil Rights,
It seems, thankfully, most people would prefer the government actualy do something about terror, rather than complaining about being watched while surfing the Net in libraries, before the next 9-11 happens.
But the First protects stripping and flag-burning, at least according to the ACLU, which takes the First, Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth to ridiculous extremes, but suddenly gets all original intent and textualist on us when it comes to RTBA. I smell an agenda, not a protector of liberties.
Yeah, the states demanded a Bill of Rights to ensure that the government's powers were protected!
The ACLU, for whom the Constitution is a means, not an end.
Because Echelon pre-dates the Patriot Act by many years? Because the two are not tied together in any way? Because Echelon network is mostly in foreign countries (I have never seen any verifiable proof that Echelon hardware is in US), and therefore cannot be used to intercept strictly domestic US communications (as Patriot can)? From your link,