This would be similar to the US going to, say Japan, and taking ownership of Toyota, Honda, Mitsubish, etc. because their automobiles are an important part of our country. Or going to Canada and taking ownership of the lumber, oil, and cattle industries.
Or the US going to, say an oil-rich Middle Eastern nation, and invading and occupying it because its resources are important to our country?
Exactly (and mod you up too). I absolutely agree that the UN is the last org to be running this. But as long as forums like/. and others (where I would expect some good ideas for working this out to appear first) feature sub-John-Bolton comments like grandparent, we get the public-discussion equivalent of Gresham's Law.
God, I am *so* sick of listening to this stupid jingo bullshit from my own countrymen. There is *no* argument here worth even answering. "First letter is I, for "international"". Right. As in "W" for "World Series". All this deserves is sarcasm.
Uh, no, actually, it doesn't; there is no commonly accepted standard about this, even in news organizations. Although what you say is often *recommended*, it's quite common around the world to refer to foreign organizations with acronyms that summarize the organization's name in your native language (whatever that may be). Par example: "Doctors Without Borders" is the commonly found English translation of the *official* name of the organization Medecins Sans Frontiers. I've seen DWB used instead of MSF as the acronym for this organization in many places in the Anglophone press. Similar examples exist for most other organizations, states, etc.
BTW: It's either arrogant or ignorant in the extreme to pretend rules exist that favor your language over others when such rules don't actually exist.
"Unlike private corporations governments have incredible methods of ignoring laws and...writing new ones that control access and content. They also are very good at pushing an agenda with such services."
That's absolutely hilarious. And corporations *don't* regularly ignore existing laws (like Enron), get new ones passed (by buying legislators), or push an agenda (with astroturf articles like the case in point)?!
Weak; typical nerd butchboy-wannabe machines mixing it up. I'd rather see 'em gettin' down and doin' the horizontal moto-mambo than doing Road Warrior outtakes. Of course, Paul Di Fillipo already dealt with that possibility, so I guess it's no biggie.
Not offtopic at all: This intransigence on Bush's part is exactly what Karl Rove and his supporters want. And they've managed to sucker a large part of the American electorate into believing that this is in their own interests.
And not passe AT ALL. I didn't vote for these motherfuckers either time, and I'll be good-god-damned if I'll let them go on defining us to the rest of the world.
Of course it follows, you prat. You're the one tying social structures to biological facts and determining what is "natural" or "artificial". As though one actually determined the other, and did so completely!
Marriage is a social structure supported by all states and religions on Earth, and for many reasons beyond procreation. So your argument attempting to restrict its scope on grounds of procreative biology alone is specious on its face. If you think the current struggle over the nature of this important -- and completely artificial -- social structure (as though such institutions were ever anything but) has anything at all to do with the facts of biology, then I really don't have the tongue to answer your ignorance (hint: The two are no more linked than are laws prohibiting murder and the collection of medical procedures commonly known as abortion). As for infertility being a "defect", good heavens duncemeat: Married heterosexual couples can also choose not to have children! Does that mean their marriage is an artifical structure not grounded in biological fact, and therefore needs a constitutional amendment banning it? Or is their choice some kind of biological defect (lol)?
As for the Nazi business: Invoke Godwin's law all you want, my boy. You don't seem smart enough for me to give a shit about what you think, your discourse is certainly puerile, and Godwin's is always a good way to end a stupid thread. But assuming you aren't called a Nazi several times a week, then this is a new experience for you, in which case you can take away this worthwhile consideration: In any given colloquy, how certain are you that you are actually reasoning about a problem instead of rationalizing your visceral hatreds and fears?
"[Various homosexual groupings] are not [equivalent from a functional point of view]. They require an external element to achieve the functionality inherent in the biologically grounded unions."
Oh for pity's sake, what a Nazi. By that logic, infertile heterosexual couples -- or horrors, infertile het couples with adoptive children! -- constitute an "artificial social structure" with no "compelling reason" for the state to recognize them. Do you libs even get what's going on here? Does German disapproval of "artificial means" of "maintaining the alien Jew" ring a fucking bell?
This is fucking hopeless. The country is full of nothing but mad cowboys, fag-bashers and knuckle-draggers. And I mean that in the nicest possible way....
You aren't the only one who was there, dingweed. Christ, what bunk. Like Rayguy had precisely *anything* to do with the Soviet collapse (or even helped it all; left Gorbie high and dry). Lord save us from mad cowboy disease..
And there's an excellent example of exactly why America will never return to the kind of greatness this foreign person (and I) wish for: Pathetic, pedantic idiots like cmburns69. Once and for all, Mr. Dumas: A republic is a *form* of democracy, like a constitutional monarchy is also a *form* of democracy!
Bah, what a troll. But then that's part of the usual right-wing insistence on time-wasting, obscurantist, pendantic "corrections" which, more often than not, are completely wrong, outright fabrications, or entirely content-free.
Like Rush's (and other's) insistence on calling their opponents the "Democrat Party". So we should all call them the "Republic Party"?
Parent has it exactly right. It's just another distribution modality, folks, one you've seen before, that just so happens to fit quite nicely into a particular niche: Making it way stupid-easy for noobs to get introduced to and enthusiastic about a game.
Nobody said it was The One Size Fits All Way To Go For All Software Everywhere (sheesh). Is this some kinda Software Panacea syndrome peculiar to Linux geeks, that they have to announce the Next Big Thing every 10 minutes?
If anything, it *might* be a great way to introduce niche markets to other Linux apps. It certainly gets users over the Fear of a Bad Config problem.
Zeus, what arrogance. I know/. is Geek City, but when are people here going to wake up to the fact that remaining blissfully ignorant of how some of the tech around you works does not, by definition, make people "stupid", "idiots", "drones", or any of the other pejoratives I see constantly slung about here? A good third of you have no idea how the electrical supply system really works, let alone how to fix it if it goes wrong. Yet you depend on it every day to run your cherished machines. Does that make you a "drone"?
The man in the street has every right to expect his tech to work without repeated catastrophic failures or undertaking major surgery on his own -- something every civil or aeronautical or electrical engineer knows (because they get busted if they don't). The moment more than 10% of software "engineers" understand that, the sooner they will have earned the right to that honorific.
Mod me -200 flamebait, but if you're looking around for a reason why your job's departing to overseas semi-competents, re-read the post.
Slashdot Mirror
This would be similar to the US going to, say Japan, and taking ownership of Toyota, Honda, Mitsubish, etc. because their automobiles are an important part of our country. Or going to Canada and taking ownership of the lumber, oil, and cattle industries. Or the US going to, say an oil-rich Middle Eastern nation, and invading and occupying it because its resources are important to our country?
Exactly (and mod you up too). I absolutely agree that the UN is the last org to be running this. But as long as forums like /. and others (where I would expect some good ideas for working this out to appear first) feature sub-John-Bolton comments like grandparent, we get the public-discussion equivalent of Gresham's Law.
Mod parent up double :-). If we didn't have jingo morons waving the bloody shirt every 5 minutes, we might have some prayer of working this out.
God, I am *so* sick of listening to this stupid jingo bullshit from my own countrymen. There is *no* argument here worth even answering. "First letter is I, for "international"". Right. As in "W" for "World Series". All this deserves is sarcasm.
Easy one: Because it's Fox Network, where morons like Bill O'Lielly are big stars.
Hey! Yet another slope-browed A/C idiot! I thought they were all offline and hanging around a hospice in Florida this week!
No. Imitiation is the *sincerest* form of flattery, which is not the same thing as the "best".
Uh, no, actually, it doesn't; there is no commonly accepted standard about this, even in news organizations. Although what you say is often *recommended*, it's quite common around the world to refer to foreign organizations with acronyms that summarize the organization's name in your native language (whatever that may be). Par example: "Doctors Without Borders" is the commonly found English translation of the *official* name of the organization Medecins Sans Frontiers. I've seen DWB used instead of MSF as the acronym for this organization in many places in the Anglophone press. Similar examples exist for most other organizations, states, etc.
BTW: It's either arrogant or ignorant in the extreme to pretend rules exist that favor your language over others when such rules don't actually exist.
Thanks for an illuminating discussions, gentlepersons. Rare on /., but it apparently still does happen from time to time....
"Unlike private corporations governments have incredible methods of ignoring laws and ...writing new ones that control access and content. They also are very good at pushing an agenda with such services."
That's absolutely hilarious. And corporations *don't* regularly ignore existing laws (like Enron), get new ones passed (by buying legislators), or push an agenda (with astroturf articles like the case in point)?!
THANK YOU for sticking with the point and not letting the Orwellian nature of current US political discourse sidetrack you.
*Classic* example of what's wrong with the debate in the US today, and how we managed to end up with this monkey-like warmonger in power *again*....
Weak; typical nerd butchboy-wannabe machines mixing it up. I'd rather see 'em gettin' down and doin' the horizontal moto-mambo than doing Road Warrior outtakes. Of course, Paul Di Fillipo already dealt with that possibility, so I guess it's no biggie.
What a sleazy moron. Maybe you could keep it in your ass instead?
Not offtopic at all: This intransigence on Bush's part is exactly what Karl Rove and his supporters want. And they've managed to sucker a large part of the American electorate into believing that this is in their own interests.
And not passe AT ALL. I didn't vote for these motherfuckers either time, and I'll be good-god-damned if I'll let them go on defining us to the rest of the world.
Of course it follows, you prat. You're the one tying social structures to biological facts and determining what is "natural" or "artificial". As though one actually determined the other, and did so completely!
Marriage is a social structure supported by all states and religions on Earth, and for many reasons beyond procreation. So your argument attempting to restrict its scope on grounds of procreative biology alone is specious on its face. If you think the current struggle over the nature of this important -- and completely artificial -- social structure (as though such institutions were ever anything but) has anything at all to do with the facts of biology, then I really don't have the tongue to answer your ignorance (hint: The two are no more linked than are laws prohibiting murder and the collection of medical procedures commonly known as abortion). As for infertility being a "defect", good heavens duncemeat: Married heterosexual couples can also choose not to have children! Does that mean their marriage is an artifical structure not grounded in biological fact, and therefore needs a constitutional amendment banning it? Or is their choice some kind of biological defect (lol)?
As for the Nazi business: Invoke Godwin's law all you want, my boy. You don't seem smart enough for me to give a shit about what you think, your discourse is certainly puerile, and Godwin's is always a good way to end a stupid thread. But assuming you aren't called a Nazi several times a week, then this is a new experience for you, in which case you can take away this worthwhile consideration: In any given colloquy, how certain are you that you are actually reasoning about a problem instead of rationalizing your visceral hatreds and fears?
"[Various homosexual groupings] are not [equivalent from a functional point of view]. They require an external element to achieve the functionality inherent in the biologically grounded unions." Oh for pity's sake, what a Nazi. By that logic, infertile heterosexual couples -- or horrors, infertile het couples with adoptive children! -- constitute an "artificial social structure" with no "compelling reason" for the state to recognize them.
Do you libs even get what's going on here? Does German disapproval of "artificial means" of "maintaining the alien Jew" ring a fucking bell?
This is fucking hopeless. The country is full of nothing but mad cowboys, fag-bashers and knuckle-draggers. And I mean that in the nicest possible way....
You aren't the only one who was there, dingweed. Christ, what bunk. Like Rayguy had precisely *anything* to do with the Soviet collapse (or even helped it all; left Gorbie high and dry). Lord save us from mad cowboy disease..
And there's an excellent example of exactly why America will never return to the kind of greatness this foreign person (and I) wish for: Pathetic, pedantic idiots like cmburns69. Once and for all, Mr. Dumas: A republic is a *form* of democracy, like a constitutional monarchy is also a *form* of democracy!
"We don't eat bread! We eat WHOLE WHEAT!"
Bah, what a troll. But then that's part of the usual right-wing insistence on time-wasting, obscurantist, pendantic "corrections" which, more often than not, are completely wrong, outright fabrications, or entirely content-free.
Like Rush's (and other's) insistence on calling their opponents the "Democrat Party". So we should all call them the "Republic Party"?
Please. They're about as reliable and objective as Faux Nudes.
Parent has it exactly right. It's just another distribution modality, folks, one you've seen before, that just so happens to fit quite nicely into a particular niche: Making it way stupid-easy for noobs to get introduced to and enthusiastic about a game.
Nobody said it was The One Size Fits All Way To Go For All Software Everywhere (sheesh). Is this some kinda Software Panacea syndrome peculiar to Linux geeks, that they have to announce the Next Big Thing every 10 minutes?
If anything, it *might* be a great way to introduce niche markets to other Linux apps. It certainly gets users over the Fear of a Bad Config problem.
Calm down, Chicken Little, it doesn't say that. In fact, the article is almost entirely content-free.
Oh, for shite's sake. Even the tards think they're educated now....
Zeus, what arrogance. I know /. is Geek City, but when are people here going to wake up to the fact that remaining blissfully ignorant of how some of the tech around you works does not, by definition, make people "stupid", "idiots", "drones", or any of the other pejoratives I see constantly slung about here? A good third of you have no idea how the electrical supply system really works, let alone how to fix it if it goes wrong. Yet you depend on it every day to run your cherished machines. Does that make you a "drone"?
The man in the street has every right to expect his tech to work without repeated catastrophic failures or undertaking major surgery on his own -- something every civil or aeronautical or electrical engineer knows (because they get busted if they don't). The moment more than 10% of software "engineers" understand that, the sooner they will have earned the right to that honorific.
Mod me -200 flamebait, but if you're looking around for a reason why your job's departing to overseas semi-competents, re-read the post.