IE 6 is going to be around for awhile and there's nothing you can do about it. Some of you are going to have to support it because your boss tells you too. I'm sure it's not the only thing your boss tells you to do that you'd rather not. That's why they call it work.
You can choose to believe the earth is flat if you wish.
I was hoping you could just read the thread instead of having me spoon-feed it to you, but here goes. Xyrus was arguing that such laws don't help because there are still teens who find a way to abuse drugs. I was arguing that there are other teens that will consider the consequences of being caught and be inhibited from doing it.
Then in response you said "So you're okay with hurting the majority of kids by oppressing their freedom knowing full-well that the *really* bad apples will not in any way be restricted?"
Do you see why what you said doesn't make any sense in the context of the thread? If you don't, then I guess you'll just have to to interpret that as "I acknowledge bla bla bla". Oh, and be careful you don't sail over the edge.
You disputed the statement "parents can't be aware of what their children are doing 100% of the time". What part of "100% of the time" don't you understand? To say that monitoring isn't necessary to know what your child is doing 100% of the time is absurd.
Why don't you just admit that the percentage is less than 100% and gain some credibility.
"Not only is it possible, it's the fundamental responsibility of parenting: know what's going on in your kid's life. If you can't do this, you have failed."
Listen, bub. There's no parent on the planet who knows what their children are doing 100% of the time, so they must all be failures.
Sure, good thing your mother guided you in the safe way of enjoying porn.
Seriously, this idea of adults guiding young people in responsible vice is pure BS. The best guidance parents can give their kids is to not smoke, drink, or troll for porn.
Your comment reminds me a bit of a question we were asked during jury selection: If you're driving down the highway and you see a car pulled over by the police what do you think happened?
Apple and the police have their own agendas just as Gizmodo does.
Because sorting is data dependent. That means that the OS must rely on the application to do it. For some applications it doesn't make sense or maybe the developer was lazy. So the OS provides the tools that support sorting by header but it's up to the application developer to decide if he/she wants to implement it.
Well, if it's your religion I believe that you know it better than I do. On the other hand, I think that manipulating scripture by opportunists is a nearly universal phenomenon.
Slashdot Mirror
"People with low UIDs are typically IT professionals, engineers or scientists with at least 10 years of experience in their respective fields."
And you base this on?
But he wasn't selling a story.
Yeah, Wired won't pay you to give them somebody else's property, but they'll gladly accept it for free.
I don't know - taking a felon's job sounds like a pretty easy act to follow:
PHB: "It took you that long? Why Terry could have done it .. Ugh never mind.
So Frost loss the case I'll bet.
"A low UID does not make you smart I see."
You just figured that out? What could a low UID mean other than stumbling onto the site earlier than some other people?
IE 6 is going to be around for awhile and there's nothing you can do about it. Some of you are going to have to support it because your boss tells you too. I'm sure it's not the only thing your boss tells you to do that you'd rather not. That's why they call it work.
You can choose to believe the earth is flat if you wish.
I was hoping you could just read the thread instead of having me spoon-feed it to you, but here goes. Xyrus was arguing that such laws don't help because there are still teens who find a way to abuse drugs. I was arguing that there are other teens that will consider the consequences of being caught and be inhibited from doing it.
Then in response you said "So you're okay with hurting the majority of kids by oppressing their freedom knowing full-well that the *really* bad apples will not in any way be restricted?"
Do you see why what you said doesn't make any sense in the context of the thread? If you don't, then I guess you'll just have to to interpret that as "I acknowledge bla bla bla". Oh, and be careful you don't sail over the edge.
You disputed the statement "parents can't be aware of what their children are doing 100% of the time". What part of "100% of the time" don't you understand? To say that monitoring isn't necessary to know what your child is doing 100% of the time is absurd.
Why don't you just admit that the percentage is less than 100% and gain some credibility.
Apparently you're not following this discussion carefully enough.
So you agree.
Yes, there will always be some kids that will ignore the consequences. That doesn't mean the majority aren't going to be inhibited by them.
Well, at least if you're going to ignore your father's input forever, I'm glad it was for something important like a movie.
"Not only is it possible, it's the fundamental responsibility of parenting: know what's going on in your kid's life. If you can't do this, you have failed."
Listen, bub. There's no parent on the planet who knows what their children are doing 100% of the time, so they must all be failures.
It's more like some schools are no longer selling soda and candy. In many cases they started selling the stuff because they were hurting for money.
"It is not the job of retailers to prevent kids from getting into trouble."
Apparently it is their job to PROFIT from kids getting into trouble.
There is no "responsible" way of smoking.
Sure, good thing your mother guided you in the safe way of enjoying porn.
Seriously, this idea of adults guiding young people in responsible vice is pure BS. The best guidance parents can give their kids is to not smoke, drink, or troll for porn.
"California law requires anything over $100 be turned over to the police and only after 90 days if no one claims it can you then have it."
And how could one prove that it was worth more than $100?
Your comment reminds me a bit of a question we were asked during jury selection: If you're driving down the highway and you see a car pulled over by the police what do you think happened?
Apple and the police have their own agendas just as Gizmodo does.
"why can't I always sort by clicking the header?"
Because sorting is data dependent. That means that the OS must rely on the application to do it. For some applications it doesn't make sense or maybe the developer was lazy. So the OS provides the tools that support sorting by header but it's up to the application developer to decide if he/she wants to implement it.
Sure. Being able to sort a list by clicking on the column name really sucks.
"Do you have any idea how many specialized pieces of equipment out there are controlled by OS/2?"
It's probably far fewer than the number of devices controlled by DOS or Windows or Linux.
A more consistent cross-browser experience?
Well, if it's your religion I believe that you know it better than I do. On the other hand, I think that manipulating scripture by opportunists is a nearly universal phenomenon.