Off topic, and I apologize for that, but I had a coworker ask me if I believed that Obama had ever eaten dog, because we all know that he was born in another country.
That is exactly my question. My car doesn't pollute too awful much, but all of the 'my cars' in Chicago? That's a different story. And if even as another poster said, all this does is speed up the uptake and output of water into the natural system, what will that do?
No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible
One has to wonder about the impact of several million of these, though. - One car doesn't do much polluting, but Los Angeles sure does have a lot of smog.
And what's wrong with that? It's perfectly legal, well practiced, and has many precedents. So there shouldn't be a problem with that type of behavior. Right?
Exactly. Most people aren't concerned with their on-line privacy, because they don't understand the issue. They see that the people they know can see the pictures of their cute kids. They don't see/b/ or reddit or 9gag or someone else taking that picture, morphing it into a meme, and unleashing it on the world (side note, in my opinion, this is the slightest invasion of privacy available to you today; at worst, corporations use your information to use 'targeted ads' on you).
There needs to be an organization devoted to privacy issues (I'm sure there is), and education about appropriate vs inappropriate behavior apparently needs to start in grade school, because in my honest opinion, it is plain that parents aren't supplying any lessons there.
This was my first thought, exactly. I always view the world as what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So this law protects your ignorant ass lessons about how the world is 6000 years old? Guess what, it protects mine that says that the world was created when God gave Satan a rusty trombone.
What? That's not protected? How so?
People always forget that free speech protects what they hate, not just what they love. I can't wait for this to bite them in the ass.
It's called hyperbole, sir, or ma'am. It can be defined as , "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton."
When making a point, I find it is often necessary to make it as large and as obviously over the top as possible, to really drive the point home. It's a literary device, it's a sales-tactic and it's a form of speech that people use quite often in everyday conversation.
As an aside; my question to you is this; how does one grow up working in a tax service? I, for one, grew up on a farm. Or, it could be argued that I grew up in school. Or, it could also be argued that I grew up in the Boy Scouts. But, really, how does one grow up while performing a professional job?
Exactly. There are a few things that spending just a little money can get the job done quickly and efficiently. The last time I checked, at-home software ranged in price from 30-100 dollars. You have to file taxes = you have some kind of income or other type of money changing hands somewhere. SO, you can't spare $30 to ensure that something which can send you to jail is done correctly?
That's called common sense and compromise. I'LL HAVE NONE OF THAT, THANK YOU. It's either everything or nothing, just like every other aspect of life, right? Remember that most choices you make are absolutes in black and white, and never shades of gray. Right?
and of course, this assumes that there is no underlying graft going on between the textbook companies and the state representatives, parent groups, school boards, teachers (rarely), lobbyists, and other assorted meddling government employees and members of the publicdepending on what state you live in specifying the books. . .
Still not bugged enough? Think about this technology in the hands of entities far more dangerous than merchants; law enforcement, for example.
Honestly, at this point government is so inefficient that I'm not concerned about them having my personal information (except maybe when they don't secure said information.
So my name, blood type and address sit in a government storehouse for a hundred years? It'll be at least that long before someone is hired that can properly design, then complete form F-AA11b.1.1.X2 'request for acquisition of Loughla's account information'.
In all seriousness, though, government agencies don't scare me as much as private entities.
My favorite phrase to hear after a co-worker, family member (or even once my wife) goes shopping, "I had to buy it, I saved sooooo much money on it," or, "I had to spend $x to save $x. But who can pass that up? Look at how much I saved!!!"
You do realize that a better way to save money is to not spend it in the first place, right? People that purchase an item only because of the 'deal' they get on it are cattle. People that shop smart and look for coupons/deals/discounts on something they need anyway are smart. The breakdown comes because we've been trained to believe that wants are now needs.
Yeah, what ever happened to acid rain? I remember that the northeast portion of Canada had melting statues and buildings (yes, a bit of a hyperbole, but you get the idea) in the 90's. Where'd all that go?
DID THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF CANADA MELT OFF, AND THE NEWS AGENCIES JUST NOT TELL US???
Because the government is known for keeping their facili. . . wait, their anything up to date and current?
And before you shout PRIVATE OWNERSHIP, do you really want a corporation to have access to radioactive materials in your neighborhood? Will you really trust a board of directors to make decisions based on health and well-being, and not worry about maximizing profits at the expense of safety? Corporations never cut corners to save a buck, right?
I would argue that linux, in the scheme of home computing, isn't a rival product. How many regular joe-schmoe characters see linux as a viable alternative to windows?
I bet that number is pretty small. Does that mean linux is less valuable (before the firestorm), no, no it does not. Does that mean that linux doesn't matter, no, again, it does not.
Does it mean that Microsoft could care less about linux in its current form as a rival? Maybe?
This was my exact first thought. We wrap so much up in the 'protect our children' blanket, that it should be obvious at this day and age that practically anything that claims to be for children's sake will be turned against us, quickly.
Touche. Well played, Sir (or Madam). My experience has been that police will F*** up your day if you give them a reason. That reason may seem insignificant (and in the one case it happened to me, was because I refused to leave the site of a protest that had been dismantled on private property - seemed acceptable to me at the time), and may even be well within your rights, but nonetheless, there's always a reason.
I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying that it is true based on my experience.
Yes. I do. Not good experience, either. I've been arrested (later released with no charges) for being part of a peaceful protest in the early 2000's. I was simply stating that the above comment is hyperbole, "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect." It was in response to the comment, "^----this."
What I was saying is that being beaten and arrested is not really within the experience of the average American. That it happens at all is a travesty, but not the average, and therefore. . . . . . .
Your own experience is based on someone else's story of what happened. Are you sure your friend did ABSOLUTELY nothing to get arrested? I'm not saying that it's right, I'm saying that there are always two sides to the story, and I absolutely detest when either side uses extremes to make their point
And re the god games thing. What is winning for a modern country anyway? Are societies supposed to have a point to them then? According to who? Build the most nukes or maybe get the highest GDP. How about the goal being to have as much leisure time as possible, to be as happy as possible and to have and to cause (outside your country as well as inside) as little suffering as possible?
I believe that this is the main problem with our modern society. We are in an age where we have the potential to have as much leisure time with as little suffering as possible through the miracle of modern technology.
But what do we do? We still view everything as if we ride horses, use swords and believe that sickness is caused by magic and can only be cured by (incredibly expensive) magic. Who can we take over next? Who can we impose our will on next? Who can be made to stand in our line? Who can be our ally against them? HOW CAN WE RULE IT ALL????
The point you make that is brilliant, in my opinion, is that there is no 'them' anymore. It's 'us over here', and 'us over there'. We need to change our definition of winning, and in doing-so, change the definition of culture, the structure of culture and its ability to influence our actions. That seems to be the issue.
Slashdot Mirror
Because, They Took Our JJJEEEEERRRRRBBBBBSSS
Off topic, and I apologize for that, but I had a coworker ask me if I believed that Obama had ever eaten dog, because we all know that he was born in another country.
Part of my brain fell out.
Please elaborate.
That's called compromise and common sense, and 'MERKA will have none of THAT, thank you very much.
That is exactly my question. My car doesn't pollute too awful much, but all of the 'my cars' in Chicago? That's a different story. And if even as another poster said, all this does is speed up the uptake and output of water into the natural system, what will that do?
Would we be robbing Peter to pay Paul?
no matter how many of them you install
No snowflake in an avalanche ever feels responsible
One has to wonder about the impact of several million of these, though. - One car doesn't do much polluting, but Los Angeles sure does have a lot of smog.
And what's wrong with that? It's perfectly legal, well practiced, and has many precedents. So there shouldn't be a problem with that type of behavior. Right?
God, I wish there was a sarcasm font.
Exactly. Most people aren't concerned with their on-line privacy, because they don't understand the issue. They see that the people they know can see the pictures of their cute kids. They don't see /b/ or reddit or 9gag or someone else taking that picture, morphing it into a meme, and unleashing it on the world (side note, in my opinion, this is the slightest invasion of privacy available to you today; at worst, corporations use your information to use 'targeted ads' on you).
There needs to be an organization devoted to privacy issues (I'm sure there is), and education about appropriate vs inappropriate behavior apparently needs to start in grade school, because in my honest opinion, it is plain that parents aren't supplying any lessons there.
This was my first thought, exactly. I always view the world as what's good for the goose is good for the gander. So this law protects your ignorant ass lessons about how the world is 6000 years old? Guess what, it protects mine that says that the world was created when God gave Satan a rusty trombone.
What? That's not protected? How so?
People always forget that free speech protects what they hate, not just what they love. I can't wait for this to bite them in the ass.
It's called hyperbole, sir, or ma'am. It can be defined as , "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect, as in I could sleep for a year or This book weighs a ton."
When making a point, I find it is often necessary to make it as large and as obviously over the top as possible, to really drive the point home. It's a literary device, it's a sales-tactic and it's a form of speech that people use quite often in everyday conversation.
As an aside; my question to you is this; how does one grow up working in a tax service? I, for one, grew up on a farm. Or, it could be argued that I grew up in school. Or, it could also be argued that I grew up in the Boy Scouts. But, really, how does one grow up while performing a professional job?
Perhaps you should check your unnecessary rage?
Exactly. There are a few things that spending just a little money can get the job done quickly and efficiently. The last time I checked, at-home software ranged in price from 30-100 dollars. You have to file taxes = you have some kind of income or other type of money changing hands somewhere. SO, you can't spare $30 to ensure that something which can send you to jail is done correctly?
That's called common sense and compromise. I'LL HAVE NONE OF THAT, THANK YOU. It's either everything or nothing, just like every other aspect of life, right? Remember that most choices you make are absolutes in black and white, and never shades of gray. Right?
and of course, this assumes that there is no underlying graft going on between the textbook companies and the state representatives, parent groups, school boards, teachers (rarely), lobbyists, and other assorted meddling government employees and members of the public depending on what state you live in specifying the books. . .
FTFY
How many 'free aps' do you have on your smartphone? How much did you pay for your internet browser?
Still not bugged enough? Think about this technology in the hands of entities far more dangerous than merchants; law enforcement, for example.
Honestly, at this point government is so inefficient that I'm not concerned about them having my personal information (except maybe when they don't secure said information.
So my name, blood type and address sit in a government storehouse for a hundred years? It'll be at least that long before someone is hired that can properly design, then complete form F-AA11b.1.1.X2 'request for acquisition of Loughla's account information'.
In all seriousness, though, government agencies don't scare me as much as private entities.
My favorite phrase to hear after a co-worker, family member (or even once my wife) goes shopping, "I had to buy it, I saved sooooo much money on it," or, "I had to spend $x to save $x. But who can pass that up? Look at how much I saved!!!"
You do realize that a better way to save money is to not spend it in the first place, right? People that purchase an item only because of the 'deal' they get on it are cattle. People that shop smart and look for coupons/deals/discounts on something they need anyway are smart. The breakdown comes because we've been trained to believe that wants are now needs.
Yeah, what ever happened to acid rain? I remember that the northeast portion of Canada had melting statues and buildings (yes, a bit of a hyperbole, but you get the idea) in the 90's. Where'd all that go?
DID THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF CANADA MELT OFF, AND THE NEWS AGENCIES JUST NOT TELL US???
Because the government is known for keeping their facili. . . wait, their anything up to date and current?
And before you shout PRIVATE OWNERSHIP, do you really want a corporation to have access to radioactive materials in your neighborhood? Will you really trust a board of directors to make decisions based on health and well-being, and not worry about maximizing profits at the expense of safety? Corporations never cut corners to save a buck, right?
No, technically it's your mother.
Ooooooooo, buuuurrrrrnnnnnn.
YOU KNOW NOTHING OF COMEDY!!!
What's long and hard and full of seamen?
A Submarine!!!
See, it's funny because you thought I would say penis, and I didn't. I said submarine instead of penis. That's why it's funny. Get it?
GET IT????
I would argue that linux, in the scheme of home computing, isn't a rival product. How many regular joe-schmoe characters see linux as a viable alternative to windows?
I bet that number is pretty small. Does that mean linux is less valuable (before the firestorm), no, no it does not. Does that mean that linux doesn't matter, no, again, it does not.
Does it mean that Microsoft could care less about linux in its current form as a rival? Maybe?
This was my exact first thought. We wrap so much up in the 'protect our children' blanket, that it should be obvious at this day and age that practically anything that claims to be for children's sake will be turned against us, quickly.
Here's the latest one I can think of.
Why are people still willing to fall for this?????
Touche. Well played, Sir (or Madam). My experience has been that police will F*** up your day if you give them a reason. That reason may seem insignificant (and in the one case it happened to me, was because I refused to leave the site of a protest that had been dismantled on private property - seemed acceptable to me at the time), and may even be well within your rights, but nonetheless, there's always a reason.
I'm not saying it's right. I'm just saying that it is true based on my experience.
Previous comment withdrawn. Thank you.
Yes. I do. Not good experience, either. I've been arrested (later released with no charges) for being part of a peaceful protest in the early 2000's. I was simply stating that the above comment is hyperbole, "A figure of speech in which exaggeration is used for emphasis or effect." It was in response to the comment, "^----this."
What I was saying is that being beaten and arrested is not really within the experience of the average American. That it happens at all is a travesty, but not the average, and therefore. . . . . . .
Your own experience is based on someone else's story of what happened. Are you sure your friend did ABSOLUTELY nothing to get arrested? I'm not saying that it's right, I'm saying that there are always two sides to the story, and I absolutely detest when either side uses extremes to make their point
Does that make sense?
And re the god games thing. What is winning for a modern country anyway? Are societies supposed to have a point to them then? According to who? Build the most nukes or maybe get the highest GDP. How about the goal being to have as much leisure time as possible, to be as happy as possible and to have and to cause (outside your country as well as inside) as little suffering as possible?
I believe that this is the main problem with our modern society. We are in an age where we have the potential to have as much leisure time with as little suffering as possible through the miracle of modern technology.
But what do we do? We still view everything as if we ride horses, use swords and believe that sickness is caused by magic and can only be cured by (incredibly expensive) magic. Who can we take over next? Who can we impose our will on next? Who can be made to stand in our line? Who can be our ally against them? HOW CAN WE RULE IT ALL????
The point you make that is brilliant, in my opinion, is that there is no 'them' anymore. It's 'us over here', and 'us over there'. We need to change our definition of winning, and in doing-so, change the definition of culture, the structure of culture and its ability to influence our actions. That seems to be the issue.