Take a DNA test of the mother, the father and the unborn infant.
Now tell me, does the latter match the DNA of either of it's parents? Is it part of the mother's body?
Nope...
Hence in Paul's eyes, he is protecting another human being. Agree or disagree. There is no conflict in his view.
This is probably one of the only gray areas in Libertarian viewpoint. Namely, because the side one comes down upon is determined by the individual's interpretation of life.
Let's just assume for Paul's sake, that he is indeed right, that a baby is a human life. Than he is on the right of it.
Now let's assume he is wrong. Well then, he is in the wrong against the mother's rights.
At least Paul has chosen to err on the side of life. Which I feel is the better choice.
It's called Google. Intelligent people don't cite facts to what is basically common knowledge and dozens of articles in mainstream media talking about it.
I'll feed a troll. But I won't feed a moron too stupid to Google.
Today we're having a vote to decide if America is going to round up all Italian-Americans after the recent bombing of the cruise ship by Italian terrorists.
The vote takes place at 2pm. War mongers want to round up the Italians-Americans and put them in camps to ensure the safety of the rest of America as America has just declared war against Italy in retaliation.
Oh, these 5 Senators opppose the round up. Please detain them and prevent them from voting.
---
That law is to ensure that political use of arrest can not be used to prevent democratic voting by elected officials.
To give you another example, recently the Vice-President in Iraq has had to flee after the President put out a warrant for his arrest IMMEDIATELY following the U.S. pullout from Iraq.
That's what this law is meant to prevent.
Without it, we'd be in danger of a powerful charmismatic and tyrannical President eliminating and silencing the voices that oppose him.
And let me explain to you why we are wrong. If an airline made such decision, it could do so. And it would suffer the consequences of capitalism; go out of business due to a lack of passengers as another airline would offer "ball groping free flights" (probably Southwest).
However, the unconstitutional mandate requiring such of all airlines is just that. This is not the private airlines making an uncoerced decision. Rather it is a mandated and coerced affect by the government in violation of the government's Constitution.
So yes, I have the right to choose to fly on an airline that does not grope my balls, and the government's interference in preventing airlines from offering such a service is illegal.
Were it not illegal, someone would have already started a new airline to offer just that, ball groping free travel and would be selling more tickets than all the other airlines combined.
Let's say, instead of looking at it as a substitute for a main processors. We look at a much more distributed system.
8GB of RAM with (what I'll call) an Inline RAM processor.
So it doesn't do a lot of FP. That's fine, most portables and handhelds already have a GPU. GPUs love FP. Then let's add (if necessary) a simply CPU that essentially controls drive & I/O access.
Now, I'm not saying this will replace current processors or platforms. But there might be uses. Heck, I don't know. But what if this type of RAM replaced the GPU memory on a video card. Allowing the memory itself to do some post-processing. Could we improve aliasing & refine video output even further.
I don't know. But I think it's wrong to knock a technology that's in it's infancy. There were enough naysayers to the automobile. They all turned out to be wrong. Granted, the steam powered vehicle didn't make it through history.
But let's at least give it a chance to be planted and see what sprouts.
Remember when we were told they were only monitoring people of concern with things like carnivore. Then it turned out they were monitoring politics and libertarians, and environmentalists, and any one who voiced opinion against status quo.
Okay, so let's see. Mars is a large rock. Big enough to have atmosphere. What is Mars' atmosphere made up of? Mars rock.
So let's say an asteroid that was formed in our solar system is of similar material to Mars. Oh, but Mars has activity, what's this mean. Melted rock? magma from it's core?
What similarities would exist in a rock that came from a collision of asteroids made up of similar material (which is probably fairly likely) as Mars?
Just saying...
Mind you, I'm not saying the rocks are not from Mars. But I really don't think we've got the data to make such conclusions. And I tend to chalk it up to "I want to get published Mommy".
It's the matter of "case closed" we're not open to alternatives or other thoughts. That's what I'm getting sick of. It's not the science I studied as a kid. Sure you could postulate an idea, test it, conclude that there was a potentiality. But in a game this big, such absolutes are in my book foolish.
We know the Moon was once a part of Earth because it shares similar chemical makeup to that of Earth.
Really, I am sure there are quite a few who will debate that fact. And if we visit and asteroid and determine it has similar chemical make-up. Must we conclude the asteroid came from Earth as well?
Or would it make more sense to conclude that it was a collection of mass that was available in our solar system. And not necessary derived from our little body of rock at all?
Happens all the time....people like a name. Hype is the game. It's what brings in the grant money and tenure.
So YES, absolutely. I believe that on mere conjecture of some similarities between - oh wait. We don't have any Martian rocks to test here on Earth.
Oh but we do have some rovers who've tested some aspects of Martian soil. See x & y is in both the rock we found on earth and in Mars.
Therefore, we know in our smartness that this is Martian.
Heck, the assumptions of how solar systems are arranged are being shattered. And are turning out to be different than we've hypothesized.
No, this is junk science. There is NOT enought data to make such a conclusion. To claim "this rock came from off planet, either an asteroid debris, or perhaps blown off from a nearby neighboring planet".
Seriously, how the heck do they know these rocks came from Mars? Why couldn't they be from some asteroid that passed by and hit the moon. I mean the moon is full of craters, so I assume it's been hit once or twice. And I'm sure a good hit could have sent such debris into long orbits.
This is like me finding a pair of old eye glasses and exclaiming they must have been Ben Franklins since he wore eye glasses.
I think the discussion at hand is on the value of the book. Which I believe to be good.
HTML5, poses many issues. As does HTML. Most of the issues referred to are the same that has plagued HTML.
Ironically, HTML5, thanks to Steve Jobs, has probably killed the best alternative. Which was the Flash engine.
The honest truth is that anyone who looked at the Flash engine, ActionScript3, Flex framework, etc. Would probably find it very impressive.
I've argued that Adobe erred on the their path. They should have open sourced it a long time ago. And pushed for ActionScript to be supported natively akin to JavaScript. (I think most will say that JavaScript has many flaws. JQuery is powerful and useful, but just the syntax alone shows how many hoops and hurdles have been jumped through to make it happen.)
That specs often don't match up to real world. Bugs and logic errors exist.
So more often than not, a developer is doing several re-writes & refactoring of code to achieve a final working version. Documenting each variance would consume so much time that the developer would be fired for poor performance. To a developer, it is more important to retain job, (eat, have a place to sleep, etc) then to continually document during development.
The problem is in the "check-in". There should in fact be a policy of alloting time for documenting. Once a final or near final portion of code is checked in, shown to work and behave and play with other code, and shown that the specification was indeed correct on the desired functionality needs. THEN the code should be documented for future benefit.
In fact, if one is using a source code management tool. One can enforce documentation by requiring a second check-in version as File-Documented.
But time needs to be alloted at the end of a task to document. More often than not, a developer is working on a time constraint. Management wants the fix/update as soon as possible. Developer checks code in as soon as complete so as to resolve the real world issue, and is almost immediately handed a new task.
So yes, this is a management problem, not a developer problem.
Fifth Amendment - let's just label him a terrorist (or Ron Paul supporter). And waive his right to a trial.
Sixth Amendment - well, let's see...speedy trial (took me 9 months to get mine for a traffic violation - I won too). trial by jury, hmm....Wells Fargo just sent me a new arbitration agreement in which I've apparently waived that right.
Seventh Amendment - Jury, well...if you're not getting your due process in 5 & 6....no jury for you.
Eight Amendment - cruel and unusual punishment, does 2 years of presidential election campaigning count?
Ninth Amendment - wait was that right specified in the constitution, than nope you don't have. What, little girl? You want to sell lemonade! What...no way...not unless you have a $500 license and pay a $50/day vendor fee. Stop crying or I'll throw your little *bleep* in the slammer.
Tenth Amendment - Not delegated has been absorbed into the commerce clause. So now everything is under Federal control.
Slashdot Mirror
Easy you unscientific troll.
Take a DNA test of the mother, the father and the unborn infant.
Now tell me, does the latter match the DNA of either of it's parents? Is it part of the mother's body?
Nope...
Hence in Paul's eyes, he is protecting another human being. Agree or disagree. There is no conflict in his view.
This is probably one of the only gray areas in Libertarian viewpoint. Namely, because the side one comes down upon is determined by the individual's interpretation of life.
Let's just assume for Paul's sake, that he is indeed right, that a baby is a human life. Than he is on the right of it.
Now let's assume he is wrong. Well then, he is in the wrong against the mother's rights.
At least Paul has chosen to err on the side of life. Which I feel is the better choice.
While he has given an explanation. I'll accept your judgment on that as a flip-flop.
But we might want to remember that the entire nation flip-flopped on that.
And lastly, this is Rand Paul, Ron Paul's son.
It's called Google. Intelligent people don't cite facts to what is basically common knowledge and dozens of articles in mainstream media talking about it.
I'll feed a troll. But I won't feed a moron too stupid to Google.
Hey stupid...let me explain why...
Today we're having a vote to decide if America is going to round up all Italian-Americans after the recent bombing of the cruise ship by Italian terrorists.
The vote takes place at 2pm. War mongers want to round up the Italians-Americans and put them in camps to ensure the safety of the rest of America as America has just declared war against Italy in retaliation.
Oh, these 5 Senators opppose the round up. Please detain them and prevent them from voting.
---
That law is to ensure that political use of arrest can not be used to prevent democratic voting by elected officials.
To give you another example, recently the Vice-President in Iraq has had to flee after the President put out a warrant for his arrest IMMEDIATELY following the U.S. pullout from Iraq.
That's what this law is meant to prevent.
Without it, we'd be in danger of a powerful charmismatic and tyrannical President eliminating and silencing the voices that oppose him.
You're right...
I mean seriously, why would the Honorable Senator not want his balls groped against his will and in violation of the Constitution.
Yes we do....
And let me explain to you why we are wrong. If an airline made such decision, it could do so. And it would suffer the consequences of capitalism; go out of business due to a lack of passengers as another airline would offer "ball groping free flights" (probably Southwest).
However, the unconstitutional mandate requiring such of all airlines is just that. This is not the private airlines making an uncoerced decision. Rather it is a mandated and coerced affect by the government in violation of the government's Constitution.
So yes, I have the right to choose to fly on an airline that does not grope my balls, and the government's interference in preventing airlines from offering such a service is illegal.
Were it not illegal, someone would have already started a new airline to offer just that, ball groping free travel and would be selling more tickets than all the other airlines combined.
That's not exacty correct. TSA can and has threatened people with $10,000 fines for failing to comply.
So while yes, you can walk away. They can hit you with a $10,000 fine. Yes, our rights have eroded that far. :-(
Why bother?
Everything you just said above is supported by our the current President's administration.
Remember it was President Obama's guys arguing in favor of this...not Newt's.
Just saying..
----
The difference between GWB & BO. A "GW" on the left, and an "O" on the right. All the policies are still the same as Reagan and Clinton's.
Even much worse...
The upcoming HTML5 ads which will be as invasive as Flash and just a resource hogging. But have NO ability to disable to turn off. ;-)
Welcome to the world you requested.
Let's say, instead of looking at it as a substitute for a main processors. We look at a much more distributed system.
8GB of RAM with (what I'll call) an Inline RAM processor.
So it doesn't do a lot of FP. That's fine, most portables and handhelds already have a GPU. GPUs love FP. Then let's add (if necessary) a simply CPU that essentially controls drive & I/O access.
Now, I'm not saying this will replace current processors or platforms. But there might be uses. Heck, I don't know. But what if this type of RAM replaced the GPU memory on a video card. Allowing the memory itself to do some post-processing. Could we improve aliasing & refine video output even further.
I don't know. But I think it's wrong to knock a technology that's in it's infancy. There were enough naysayers to the automobile. They all turned out to be wrong. Granted, the steam powered vehicle didn't make it through history.
But let's at least give it a chance to be planted and see what sprouts.
Agreed. You could ban hunting, and not have a Constitutional case. Banning gun ownership on the other hand is a clear violation of the Constitution.
That's what they all say...
Certainly could, and certainly would...
Remember when we were told they were only monitoring people of concern with things like carnivore. Then it turned out they were monitoring politics and libertarians, and environmentalists, and any one who voiced opinion against status quo.
Trust man to do the worst he can...
Okay, so let's see. Mars is a large rock. Big enough to have atmosphere. What is Mars' atmosphere made up of? Mars rock.
So let's say an asteroid that was formed in our solar system is of similar material to Mars. Oh, but Mars has activity, what's this mean. Melted rock? magma from it's core?
What similarities would exist in a rock that came from a collision of asteroids made up of similar material (which is probably fairly likely) as Mars?
Just saying...
Mind you, I'm not saying the rocks are not from Mars. But I really don't think we've got the data to make such conclusions. And I tend to chalk it up to "I want to get published Mommy".
It's the matter of "case closed" we're not open to alternatives or other thoughts. That's what I'm getting sick of. It's not the science I studied as a kid. Sure you could postulate an idea, test it, conclude that there was a potentiality. But in a game this big, such absolutes are in my book foolish.
We know the Moon was once a part of Earth because it shares similar chemical makeup to that of Earth.
Really, I am sure there are quite a few who will debate that fact. And if we visit and asteroid and determine it has similar chemical make-up. Must we conclude the asteroid came from Earth as well?
Or would it make more sense to conclude that it was a collection of mass that was available in our solar system. And not necessary derived from our little body of rock at all?
Happens all the time....people like a name. Hype is the game. It's what brings in the grant money and tenure.
So YES, absolutely. I believe that on mere conjecture of some similarities between - oh wait. We don't have any Martian rocks to test here on Earth.
Oh but we do have some rovers who've tested some aspects of Martian soil. See x & y is in both the rock we found on earth and in Mars.
Therefore, we know in our smartness that this is Martian.
Heck, the assumptions of how solar systems are arranged are being shattered. And are turning out to be different than we've hypothesized.
No, this is junk science. There is NOT enought data to make such a conclusion. To claim "this rock came from off planet, either an asteroid debris, or perhaps blown off from a nearby neighboring planet".
That I CAN accept...
Why we doubt climate scientists...
Seriously, how the heck do they know these rocks came from Mars? Why couldn't they be from some asteroid that passed by and hit the moon. I mean the moon is full of craters, so I assume it's been hit once or twice. And I'm sure a good hit could have sent such debris into long orbits.
This is like me finding a pair of old eye glasses and exclaiming they must have been Ben Franklins since he wore eye glasses.
"After 70 years Martin Luther King Jr's famous speech on civil rights has been released into public domain."
Millions of American school kids start messaging each other "Martin who?"
Great way to make a memorable man forgettable...
Are you being critical of the book, or HTML5.
I think the discussion at hand is on the value of the book. Which I believe to be good.
HTML5, poses many issues. As does HTML. Most of the issues referred to are the same that has plagued HTML.
Ironically, HTML5, thanks to Steve Jobs, has probably killed the best alternative. Which was the Flash engine.
The honest truth is that anyone who looked at the Flash engine, ActionScript3, Flex framework, etc. Would probably find it very impressive.
I've argued that Adobe erred on the their path. They should have open sourced it a long time ago. And pushed for ActionScript to be supported natively akin to JavaScript. (I think most will say that JavaScript has many flaws. JQuery is powerful and useful, but just the syntax alone shows how many hoops and hurdles have been jumped through to make it happen.)
That specs often don't match up to real world. Bugs and logic errors exist.
So more often than not, a developer is doing several re-writes & refactoring of code to achieve a final working version. Documenting each variance would consume so much time that the developer would be fired for poor performance. To a developer, it is more important to retain job, (eat, have a place to sleep, etc) then to continually document during development.
The problem is in the "check-in". There should in fact be a policy of alloting time for documenting. Once a final or near final portion of code is checked in, shown to work and behave and play with other code, and shown that the specification was indeed correct on the desired functionality needs. THEN the code should be documented for future benefit.
In fact, if one is using a source code management tool. One can enforce documentation by requiring a second check-in version as File-Documented.
But time needs to be alloted at the end of a task to document. More often than not, a developer is working on a time constraint. Management wants the fix/update as soon as possible. Developer checks code in as soon as complete so as to resolve the real world issue, and is almost immediately handed a new task.
So yes, this is a management problem, not a developer problem.
No, but often they can be very good books. Back in the late 90's I used Sam's Teach yourself HTML in 24 hours. Did half the book over a 2 week period.
It helped land me my first computing job.
When the clock strikes midnight and nothing happens....
Great...they'll just haul me out of my house first.
Sighs....9 down, 1 to go.
**
First Amendment - invalidated if you don't have a press pass.
Second Amendment - just you try it....especially out of your home state.
Third Amendment - woot.something is still protected for now.
Fourth Amendment - GPS tracking, infrared monitoring, phone tapping, yeah...this one's prett much dead.
Fifth Amendment - let's just label him a terrorist (or Ron Paul supporter). And waive his right to a trial.
Sixth Amendment - well, let's see...speedy trial (took me 9 months to get mine for a traffic violation - I won too). trial by jury, hmm....Wells Fargo just sent me a new arbitration agreement in which I've apparently waived that right.
Seventh Amendment - Jury, well...if you're not getting your due process in 5 & 6....no jury for you.
Eight Amendment - cruel and unusual punishment, does 2 years of presidential election campaigning count?
Ninth Amendment - wait was that right specified in the constitution, than nope you don't have. What, little girl? You want to sell lemonade! What...no way...not unless you have a $500 license and pay a $50/day vendor fee. Stop crying or I'll throw your little *bleep* in the slammer.
Tenth Amendment - Not delegated has been absorbed into the commerce clause. So now everything is under Federal control.
Funny, I believe that's what King George claimed as well.
Blast...
You might be right....
Um, a lone person in Congress has little power. But his influence has grown. And he has pushed for legislation (ie: audit the Fed).
But let's be honest, how much of what Obama wants has he gotten. Basically all of it.