I don't that that it applies to those movies. The US pushes its weight around the world and humiliates people. Are you saying that those people should win in the end?
Why do you say, "fundies"? Is it because humiliation always persuades you? Is it a good use of time, when we do it to moderates, libertarians, scientists, pacifists, and the politically disenfranchised?
In other words, you are saying that there have been no attempts at making them look like idiots. Perhaps you are saying that there were attempts, but the attempts weren't successful.
You are definitely saying that if you make somebody feel like an idiot, then he won't want to be recruited to blow you up to bits.
I am confident that if I look through books on how to win friends and influence people, then somewhere in bold letters will be the suggestion to humiliate your enemies until world peace arrives.
Yeah, I think that is it. There are too many wars due to lack of humiliation.
Just recently, I had to reject a return "request" by a customer of mine. She wasn't happy about the products or my rejection. The bottom line is that sometimes the customer really does have to suck it up.
The products that consumers buy aren't always perfect, but they are serviceable.
I'm a guy, and I worked in the hosiery department of downtown Vancouver's Sears.
Even though lingerie was a floor or 2 above, I often saw panties pass through that had an inner patch. It looked like a transparent sticker, in the shape of a maxipad. This was there, so that women could try it on, without any underwear, and still be able to return it.
Similar return policies were available for hosiery, as well, but the policies were a little more strict. For hosiery, it had to be a manufacturer's defect.
So, you can definitely return some underwear, even without any problems. I don't know how true that is for guy's underwear, though.
I would rather have guys just suck it up, and accept that we bought bad underwear, unless it is flawed beyond a shadow of a doubt.
People can in general, but if I don't have any meaningful insight or useful information, then I would try to keep the comment to an absolute minimum. A lot of comments are repetitive, wouldn't you agree?
I read that it depends on whether or not you are logged in. You have to log out before posting anonymous. Posting logged-in-anonymous is not good enough.
Zombies, you mean? I guess. As long as we don't ask them, then they will not have not-consented. We could infect them in the name of sampling and "internal advertising". We could ask them after, and since zombies can't speak, we could assume that no "No." means yes [i.e. opt out]. We need to zombify the lobbyists, too, to ensure that we destroy their last line of defense.
That isn't a useful argument, because it is too subjective. People often move away from density to avoid transit and other services. They can move back.
People can easily set their own bookmarks, so why can't they be given tech that allows them to safely modify their own hosts files, or maybe given the addresses to private name servers?
I agree with you. I honestly don't get why we all have to use the same naming scheme.
I would prefer countries be given gov.country, as opposed to the other way around.
Regarding #3, if we must confine ourselves to the burglar illustration, then it would be a case of you handing out your most prized possessions for people to look at, and then a burglar steals it. You would need a court order to prove that he did it, or whatever the law says you need to do. The key here is that most pirated stuff is done outside of the domain of the copyright holder. If the burglar was in your home, then you would not need a court order, because you would have a right to personal safety.
In short, there are already laws to deal with your scenario, so the scenario does not apply.
Slashdot Mirror
I think that they have to be gay before Google will support them.
I don't that that it applies to those movies. The US pushes its weight around the world and humiliates people. Are you saying that those people should win in the end?
Why do you say, "fundies"? Is it because humiliation always persuades you? Is it a good use of time, when we do it to moderates, libertarians, scientists, pacifists, and the politically disenfranchised?
In other words, you are saying that there have been no attempts at making them look like idiots. Perhaps you are saying that there were attempts, but the attempts weren't successful.
You are definitely saying that if you make somebody feel like an idiot, then he won't want to be recruited to blow you up to bits.
I am confident that if I look through books on how to win friends and influence people, then somewhere in bold letters will be the suggestion to humiliate your enemies until world peace arrives.
Yeah, I think that is it. There are too many wars due to lack of humiliation.
Wolves in sheep's clothing infiltrate us. Sheep in wolves clothing infiltrate them.
India yields a larger harvest, and the US is following closely behind.
My teacher in Bible college told the class that story. I'm surprised that it was that old. I guess that I wasn't paying attention.
Thanks for sharing.
I meant probably still explained in the FAQ.
That being said, don't bother looking. I just checked, and it seems that they removed it.
The reason is that they wanted to prevent people from moderating, and then deliberately trying to get the points back for later use.
Yes, that is correct. It is a feature that was built in early on. It's still explained in the FAQ.
I agree.
Just recently, I had to reject a return "request" by a customer of mine. She wasn't happy about the products or my rejection. The bottom line is that sometimes the customer really does have to suck it up.
The products that consumers buy aren't always perfect, but they are serviceable.
I'm a guy, and I worked in the hosiery department of downtown Vancouver's Sears.
Even though lingerie was a floor or 2 above, I often saw panties pass through that had an inner patch. It looked like a transparent sticker, in the shape of a maxipad. This was there, so that women could try it on, without any underwear, and still be able to return it.
Similar return policies were available for hosiery, as well, but the policies were a little more strict. For hosiery, it had to be a manufacturer's defect.
So, you can definitely return some underwear, even without any problems. I don't know how true that is for guy's underwear, though.
I would rather have guys just suck it up, and accept that we bought bad underwear, unless it is flawed beyond a shadow of a doubt.
People can in general, but if I don't have any meaningful insight or useful information, then I would try to keep the comment to an absolute minimum. A lot of comments are repetitive, wouldn't you agree?
They might need to undo them, because they modded down, but wanted to mod up.
They don't bother explaining, because they have been doing it for so long, and they assume that others already understand.
I read that it depends on whether or not you are logged in. You have to log out before posting anonymous. Posting logged-in-anonymous is not good enough.
Great response. Thanks for speaking out.
I'd like to add to that.
In the Canadian Forces, the majority of soldiers with PTSD were never in a battle or war zone. About 75% of the cases from soldiers serving in Canada.
Don't quote me on that, though. I heard it through word of mouth, from a course officer, when I was on course.
Solid psychology research consistently shows that we do not know the limits of our understanding.
Zombies, you mean? I guess. As long as we don't ask them, then they will not have not-consented. We could infect them in the name of sampling and "internal advertising". We could ask them after, and since zombies can't speak, we could assume that no "No." means yes [i.e. opt out]. We need to zombify the lobbyists, too, to ensure that we destroy their last line of defense.
The thing is that I don't trust you or anybody to own up to your decisions.
That is why I consider US to be more socialist than Canada and Europe, despite what the majority say.
That isn't a useful argument, because it is too subjective. People often move away from density to avoid transit and other services. They can move back.
Why would we need millions of years? We live in an open system. Isn't it possible for things to happen in hundreds or tens?
People can easily set their own bookmarks, so why can't they be given tech that allows them to safely modify their own hosts files, or maybe given the addresses to private name servers?
I agree with you. I honestly don't get why we all have to use the same naming scheme.
I would prefer countries be given gov.country, as opposed to the other way around.
Regarding #3, if we must confine ourselves to the burglar illustration, then it would be a case of you handing out your most prized possessions for people to look at, and then a burglar steals it. You would need a court order to prove that he did it, or whatever the law says you need to do. The key here is that most pirated stuff is done outside of the domain of the copyright holder. If the burglar was in your home, then you would not need a court order, because you would have a right to personal safety.
In short, there are already laws to deal with your scenario, so the scenario does not apply.
I agree with what you are saying.
I am curious, though. Why doesn't the Internet community form its own domain system, and not worry about ICANN?
High schoolers and college students have the most disposable income. That's why a significant chunk of marketing is targeted at them.