Not only do you think so highly of yourself that you call your self "infamous", but you suggest that your desires somehow outweigh mine. How big is your head, exactly?
I hadn't heard that "we the people" had deigned what was "needed" in cars. Glad to hear it. Can you point me to the list of exactly what's needed and what isn't? Thanks.
And yeah, "the whole of the law" my ass... until the environmental nuts, the zoning board, and the eminent domain abusers come a-knocking!
Wouldn't a better, simpler way be to simply punish wrong-doing instead of trying to legislate behavior? I guess not, in your collectivist world.
That's pretty much what I was saying: build your GUI using XUL and connect to a web service to do most of the "real work".
The only issue I have with it now is that I need to have a canvas. Then online GIS will be just dreamy. Take a look at the Javascript disaster that is most ESRI ArcIMS sites these days.
But building a desktop app with Swing is just a pain in the ass, compared with whipping up a GUI in XML and using CSS for styling.
Actually yes, one of the more enlightened responses I've heard to that sort of question in a while.
The upshot: Who cares?? It'll get figured out eventually, and we'll all be okay.
Re:Except Animals are more likely to be right.
on
Good Bad Attitude
·
· Score: 1
I thought it was pretty funny that the guy said "Yeah, us hackers knew y2k was nothing", but then in the _same post_ says, "But this greenhouse thing is spoooooooky!"
Seems like he proved your original point without even realizing it.
Saying "Bzzt!" completely overwhelms anything intelligent you might have said on the matter. You want to give Pike a hard time for answering a question in a flippant manner and then you pull off that "Bzzt" crap?
See, my first thought is that it's a wonderful attempt to create the same sort of archives we possess for well-known people of the last couple thousand years. Archived letters give us the only insight into the thinking behind their public works. Imagine how much less we'd know about Jefferson and Adams, for instance, if we didn't have the letters they penned to each other.
You're right that email is often a less formal medium, but do you/really/ think your average Nobel laureate (heheh, average) is going to be using sms or leet-speak?
I'm just a random anonymous guy and I can't stand to write such rot.
Why not launch a rocket within X miles of my house? If they're stupid enough to try it, I am certainly within my rights to sue them before they even try.
Look at any major building project: People sue all the damn time. People sue Wal-mart to keep them out. Why would this be any different, or helped by a regulation?
If a space company is dumb enough to cause an accident over your house, sue them!
Obviously, regulations will happen in the US, because we can't live without 'em. But it's bullshit. Corporations shouldn't be able to shield their owners from liability (how can you run a company that does evil shit, and yet have no responsibility? That's amazing to me), and the government shouldn't be allowed to impose laws not passed by any legislative body (which is what a regulation is).
1. Why? If they fly into something else, it's game over for them. It's in their self-interest to police themselves, and no regulation will make it more-self-interesting.
2. What's wrong with private insurance? You don't think Scaled has insurance already? Why would a regulation make it any more feasible for you to sue Scaled if some debris hit your house?
3. You don't think Scaled doesn't want to allow terrorists (oooo, ahhhh) onto its rockets?
4. Don't you think if Scaled dumped a bunch of shit on my land I'd sue them? And since the gov't owns lots of land, they certainly could sue as well?
5. How is the IRS involved in regulation? What does this have to do with anything?
Please to explain when the last time was that government regulation EVER stuck to just the two basic premises.
Also please to explain how a regulation will make it any less likely that you'll be hit by a falling rocket.
And if a rocket does fall on you, exactly what about government regulation will make any difference when you sue them into oblivion?
I can't figure out why so many of you think the market with obvious law against fraud can't handle this. Whee! The government's done such a bang-up job so far, let's let 'em have at this industry too!! Whee!
Not quite. It's cheaper for once, twice maybe, but repeat offenders would end up with, say, that lawsuit a few years ago that awarded someone BILLIONS from GM. Of course gov't steps in and says "whoa there"...
How exactly is a regulation going to stop a rocket from hitting your bedroom again?
Don't be stupid. Are you seriously suggesting that if our wonderful government didn't regulate the industry that somehow Scaled Composites, et al, WOULD drop boosters on people's houses?
Come on now. What about civil lawsuits do you not understand? Some booster falls on a house, the company would be doomed.
Are you suggesting that if they DID regulate that would somehow prevent boosters from falling on houses?
The American market can handle it all just fine already. Take for instance your silly 6G example: They don't tell people, someone goes up and gets hurt because of it, THEY SUE. And if government felt like getting involved, they could charge them with fraud.
Please to explain why the hell we need regulation here?
Nice try, but they're not all exempt. Christ, the breathless "Some spoooooky agency" shit is ridiculous on this one.
NGA is just NIMA is just DMA. Been around for decades, big whip. And the best part is, they buy plenty of their imagery from COMMERCIAL companies like Digital Globe. Whee!
Re:We WANT high labor costs! It's a Good Thing!
on
The Jobs Crunch
·
· Score: 1
Good try man, I wish I could mod you up against the socialistas around here.
Too bad the guys who think NW Europe is so great never seem to just go there. Let me spell it out for guys like Cryo: If NW Euro is such a utopia, GO THERE! I'm not kicking you out, but logically, if place A is so much better than place B, why not go there??
I see where you are with it, and I don't really disagree. I do have a couple thoughts about it though.
First, I almost think our "economic engagement" of China might be a better solution in the long run than, say, the military adventures trying to "force" democracy on places like all those you mentioned. It occurred to me, when reading your list, that we really haven't done all that well in bringing freedom and democracy to places using our tanks.
I really wonder if a goodly part of the MFN status (et al) isn't just financial, but a sort of "economic fight", where we let the infection of capitalism grow in China.
I don't ever see it as imposing our values onto others, either. Noone (well, that I know of, I guess it's possible!) forces a Chinese guy to go into a McDonalds. But the more they taste of western stuff, the more its obvious that foreigners want it. The fact that foreigners wanting U.S. stuff (whatever that stuff may be) benefits us just makes it all the sweeter.
Now I'll grant you that in the short- or even mid-term we're losing some points morally. But I think, thinking generations out, that freedom will win the day.
Also, think in terms of the benefits for all involved. It morally repugnant in a way, but in another, think of the people it benefits. Google gets to work in China, they get more money, which is paid to more employees. Imagine what the U.S. economy would look like right now if all trade with China ended, just like that. It'd be a disaster!
I think we're on the right track, really (because I'm a glass-half-full kinda guy). It's kind of a carrot vs. stick analogy.
In any event, it's good to make the brain work for a few minutes. Thanks.:)
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. I ended up sticking with tikiwiki because the code behind mediawiki was just too ugly.
I'm about to plug it in for intranet project pages; I'm hopeful.
Nah, "cince" is just five times longer than "since".
Not only do you think so highly of yourself that you call your self "infamous", but you suggest that your desires somehow outweigh mine. How big is your head, exactly?
I hadn't heard that "we the people" had deigned what was "needed" in cars. Glad to hear it. Can you point me to the list of exactly what's needed and what isn't? Thanks.
And yeah, "the whole of the law" my ass... until the environmental nuts, the zoning board, and the eminent domain abusers come a-knocking!
Wouldn't a better, simpler way be to simply punish wrong-doing instead of trying to legislate behavior? I guess not, in your collectivist world.
It's good that you are the one who gets to decide what's needed in cars and what isn't.
I was wondering who was in charge of that, thanks!
That's pretty much what I was saying: build your GUI using XUL and connect to a web service to do most of the "real work".
The only issue I have with it now is that I need to have a canvas. Then online GIS will be just dreamy. Take a look at the Javascript disaster that is most ESRI ArcIMS sites these days.
But building a desktop app with Swing is just a pain in the ass, compared with whipping up a GUI in XML and using CSS for styling.
I like how you say "real conservatives" are disgusted by what Bush/Cheney are doing, then later call them right-wing extremists.
And by the way, while the Medicare part of that act sucked rocks, the authorization of Health Savings Accounts is pretty slick.
On balance, though, I agree with you.
I think you're spot on. The less you have to do on the client side, the better, in every possible case.
I'm forced to do an app in Swing currently, and it's absolutly abhorrent. I'll take any sort of web service in an instant.
Actually yes, one of the more enlightened responses I've heard to that sort of question in a while.
The upshot: Who cares?? It'll get figured out eventually, and we'll all be okay.
I thought it was pretty funny that the guy said "Yeah, us hackers knew y2k was nothing", but then in the _same post_ says, "But this greenhouse thing is spoooooooky!"
Seems like he proved your original point without even realizing it.
Saying "Bzzt!" completely overwhelms anything intelligent you might have said on the matter. You want to give Pike a hard time for answering a question in a flippant manner and then you pull off that "Bzzt" crap?
See, my first thought is that it's a wonderful attempt to create the same sort of archives we possess for well-known people of the last couple thousand years. Archived letters give us the only insight into the thinking behind their public works. Imagine how much less we'd know about Jefferson and Adams, for instance, if we didn't have the letters they penned to each other.
/really/ think your average Nobel laureate (heheh, average) is going to be using sms or leet-speak?
You're right that email is often a less formal medium, but do you
I'm just a random anonymous guy and I can't stand to write such rot.
Whine and carp. Damn dude.
Besides, the most pressing problem for this should be SLOWING DOWN!
Why not launch a rocket within X miles of my house? If they're stupid enough to try it, I am certainly within my rights to sue them before they even try.
Look at any major building project: People sue all the damn time. People sue Wal-mart to keep them out. Why would this be any different, or helped by a regulation?
If a space company is dumb enough to cause an accident over your house, sue them!
Obviously, regulations will happen in the US, because we can't live without 'em. But it's bullshit. Corporations shouldn't be able to shield their owners from liability (how can you run a company that does evil shit, and yet have no responsibility? That's amazing to me), and the government shouldn't be allowed to impose laws not passed by any legislative body (which is what a regulation is).
What about this is insightful?
1. Why? If they fly into something else, it's game over for them. It's in their self-interest to police themselves, and no regulation will make it more-self-interesting.
2. What's wrong with private insurance? You don't think Scaled has insurance already? Why would a regulation make it any more feasible for you to sue Scaled if some debris hit your house?
3. You don't think Scaled doesn't want to allow terrorists (oooo, ahhhh) onto its rockets?
4. Don't you think if Scaled dumped a bunch of shit on my land I'd sue them? And since the gov't owns lots of land, they certainly could sue as well?
5. How is the IRS involved in regulation? What does this have to do with anything?
Please to explain when the last time was that government regulation EVER stuck to just the two basic premises.
Also please to explain how a regulation will make it any less likely that you'll be hit by a falling rocket.
And if a rocket does fall on you, exactly what about government regulation will make any difference when you sue them into oblivion?
I can't figure out why so many of you think the market with obvious law against fraud can't handle this. Whee! The government's done such a bang-up job so far, let's let 'em have at this industry too!! Whee!
Not quite. It's cheaper for once, twice maybe, but repeat offenders would end up with, say, that lawsuit a few years ago that awarded someone BILLIONS from GM. Of course gov't steps in and says "whoa there"...
How exactly is a regulation going to stop a rocket from hitting your bedroom again?
Don't be stupid. Are you seriously suggesting that if our wonderful government didn't regulate the industry that somehow Scaled Composites, et al, WOULD drop boosters on people's houses?
Come on now. What about civil lawsuits do you not understand? Some booster falls on a house, the company would be doomed.
Are you suggesting that if they DID regulate that would somehow prevent boosters from falling on houses?
The American market can handle it all just fine already. Take for instance your silly 6G example: They don't tell people, someone goes up and gets hurt because of it, THEY SUE. And if government felt like getting involved, they could charge them with fraud.
Please to explain why the hell we need regulation here?
LOL
"electric chairs"
Shit man, you socialists are nasty!
Okay, I don't get it.
Either GWB is a religious fanatic, or he's not. If he is, wouldn't you think he'd WANT a theocracy?
Were you Sagan's personal friend? If not, you're pretty presumptuous trying to assume what he would or would not say, don't you think?
Nice job, taking a discussion of a scientific show and twisting it some anti-Bush political screed.
Nice try. I was in Wales for 6 months, been all over the continent. Nice place, I don't care to move there though.
All I'm suggesting is, if it's such a paradise and you love it so much (collective "you"), why not just go there?
I'm not saying it to be mean. I'm saying it as pure logic and reason: Why suffer here if it's as bad as they claim it is?
Nice try, but they're not all exempt. Christ, the breathless "Some spoooooky agency" shit is ridiculous on this one.
NGA is just NIMA is just DMA. Been around for decades, big whip. And the best part is, they buy plenty of their imagery from COMMERCIAL companies like Digital Globe. Whee!
Good try man, I wish I could mod you up against the socialistas around here.
Too bad the guys who think NW Europe is so great never seem to just go there. Let me spell it out for guys like Cryo: If NW Euro is such a utopia, GO THERE! I'm not kicking you out, but logically, if place A is so much better than place B, why not go there??
For a..... web site??
I see where you are with it, and I don't really disagree. I do have a couple thoughts about it though.
:)
First, I almost think our "economic engagement" of China might be a better solution in the long run than, say, the military adventures trying to "force" democracy on places like all those you mentioned. It occurred to me, when reading your list, that we really haven't done all that well in bringing freedom and democracy to places using our tanks.
I really wonder if a goodly part of the MFN status (et al) isn't just financial, but a sort of "economic fight", where we let the infection of capitalism grow in China.
I don't ever see it as imposing our values onto others, either. Noone (well, that I know of, I guess it's possible!) forces a Chinese guy to go into a McDonalds. But the more they taste of western stuff, the more its obvious that foreigners want it. The fact that foreigners wanting U.S. stuff (whatever that stuff may be) benefits us just makes it all the sweeter.
Now I'll grant you that in the short- or even mid-term we're losing some points morally. But I think, thinking generations out, that freedom will win the day.
Also, think in terms of the benefits for all involved. It morally repugnant in a way, but in another, think of the people it benefits. Google gets to work in China, they get more money, which is paid to more employees. Imagine what the U.S. economy would look like right now if all trade with China ended, just like that. It'd be a disaster!
I think we're on the right track, really (because I'm a glass-half-full kinda guy). It's kind of a carrot vs. stick analogy.
In any event, it's good to make the brain work for a few minutes. Thanks.