Funny... ON the issues that bug me the most, mainly dealing with taxes and how much money to throw at whom, I generally think of the two parties as extreem far left wing and far left wing.
I can't believe this. I jump thru every hoop, dotted every i, crossed every t. I was told by two different brokers I was in.
Then, after the stock was trading in the 40s, I called Etrade to confirm I had RHAT. They said, sorry, we are still allocating the stock. We won't be able to tell you until later. What!?!?! Waiting until after the stock goes up three fold the allocate? That means if RHAT goes up, allocate it to friends. If RHAT goes down, allocate to suckers.
Then I find out that I didn't get my allocation. I'm pissed.
I guess I was one of the lucky ones. I had been refreshing the E*Trade IPO page every 20 minutes or so so I could see when it finally went public. All of a sudden I saw I had to reconfirm my bid. Not understanding why, I called my Brother, called E*Trade, resubmit my bid, called my brother back, and he resubmit his bid. All this under the 20 (?) minute timelimit which I was thinking was really a 2 hour timelimit.
I can't believe we were able to do all that in the 20 minute window. I wish they would post procedures somewhere so people don't get screwed when they don't realize they need to operate with a very real sense of urgency.
All this leads me to believe there is some real money that wanted in that RHAT and E*Trade didn't have the shares for. So they pulled this stunt to disqualify as many people as they could to make room for the Big Money(Tm).
Now I just hope the stock goes to 115 today! *smile*
What gives here? Pepsi said they would come up with a Harrier if the guy bought enough pepsi. He held up his side of the agreement. Pepsi backing out is paramount to Fraud.
If Pepsi can claim, what reasonable person would have believed we could actually deliever what we advertise, then what is to stop Intel from selling a PIII 1 Ghz that can only run at 233 Mhz? They could come back and say, who really believes a computer can go 1 Ghz.
I don't like marketers who fluff. It is not always possible to tell what is fluff and what is real. Everytime a marketer makes a claim or a promise they can not hold up to, they should lose money, or even thier job.
But that is only my thought. Yours is probably different.
I can see all the benifiets MS will get out of this site.
1) Noone breaks in. Claim the most secure 0S in the world. 2) People break in, MS fixes the bugs, downplays the seurity risk, and makes money off of a better product.
What do the crackers get?
1) They don't break in, Nothing. 2) If they break in, Nothing.
Humm... What a deal.
Who is going to waste thier time trying to get into a system they have no idea whats behind? Where are the security holes? I would hope MS has fixed all the Known problems. And until they release thier software, it will be hard to see what new is broken.
After reading the message intended for the Chinese masses, I must confess I have seen the light and must repent. It is time for me to delete the 10 gigs of MP3s I have downloaded from the web.
However, a new Quandary now arises. What do I do with the 10 gigs of MP3s I've made from my own music collection? Since I use legally obtained software that uses a pirated algorithm (Which IMHO should not be patented) I'm confused if I've seen enough light to delete them too? I think not.
And since it's going to be too hard to figure out which songs are in which category... I think I shall have to turn off the light again and live in blissful ignorance and with great Music!
Ownership of computers is still closely linked to income. Families with incomes over $75,000 were more than five times as likely to own a computer at home and 10 times more likely to have Net access than families who earned less than $10,000.
Well Duh!!!
Humm... Let's compare other things between family's who make greater than 75K vs less than 10K.
Which group owns more cars? Which group owns more houses? Which group owns more model trains? Which group owns more beer?
My point is, 10K is well below poverty. They don't own stuff. It makes no point comparing them to the top 10% of the country.
Quack
K7 Great... But what about MainBoards & Chipse
on
AMD Athlon (K7) Ships
·
· Score: 1
The K7 is finally out. This is great news. I was going to buy a K6-3 but decieded to wait for the K7 because it was so close.
But the question now is: When do we see good motherboards with decent chipsets? Until then, the CPU is pretty much worthless to me.
I'm not saying that we should attack those who are getting into the hype. I'm just pointing out that anyone who thinks Phantom Menace is only receiving the normal amount of pre-release publicity needs to open their eyes. The hype is out there.
Maybe I'm blind to the hype, but I have yet to see Lucas hype the movie. Everything I see is Pepsi Co trying to profit off the movies popularity. And this is not limited to just Pepsi Co. All the news shows are showing the trailers hopeing people will watch their shows for ratings. The magazines put the movie on their covers to sell more copies. Toys-R-Us has but out Billions and Billions of toys hoping to sell them. The hype is not there. However, the profiteering defenitly is.
The last time I checked, inherent in the execution of the penalty, is the creation of a new murderer (the executioner). If the state itself is a murderer, placing the stain of the blood of it's victims on the hands of all of it's citizens through our implicit approval, are we not all is some small way, guilty of murder? Even if you spread the blood around, it does not decrease the amount.
Interesting point. The problem is I don't concider the execution of a murderer, murder. I've always wondered why we force ourselves to use a different moral code on murders than they do on their victims. I.e., they don't think it is wrong to kill, so why should you think it is wrong to kill them? Just a thought.
Anyways, common belief is that statistics indicate almost 80 percent of the crime is commited by only 20 percent of the criminals. I don't know how true this figure is, but I've often heard it quoted by the media. If this is true, and we execute the 20 percent of the people commiting 80 percent of the crime, we will all live in a much happier place. The main faliacy to this argument is once you get rid of 80 percent of the crime there will be a lot of unemployed lawyers looking for someone to sue. It just might be better to allow them to be tied up in the criminal system rather than unlease them on the civil system.
Once again something bad has happened and the press is trying to blame everyone/everything except the killers themselves.
At first I heard the attack was racially motivated. Give me a break, only one of their victims was a minority. That is unless you think student atheletes are a minority?
Then they want to blame the internet, guns, porn, gothic clothing. It sounds to me like they are grasping at straws and attacking all the standard media scapegoats. Why can't they just report the kids where crazy. It was the kids fault. Maybe it was the parents fault. The police found bomb making supplies at the house of one of the kids. Either the kids were doing a good job of hiding this, or the parents where turning a blind eye to what was going on.
I say it is finally time for us to accept there are bad apples out there. And when we find them we should punish/eraticate them. Sure, some (but by all means not most) of them may have turned bad because of the internet, or porn, or Doom, or something. However, these are activities that 99.999 percent of the people in the country can enjoy without going crazy so why punish the majority of the public for fear of "saving" one?
The only good thing about this attack was the killers killed themselves. Sure, now we will never know why they did this. Who cares. We don't have to "protect" them for the next 20 years while we "enslave" them. We don't have to hear the arguments in 20 years that they have reformed and should be let go. We don't have to follow their media-frenzied trial for the next year. We don't have to pay for all this. Its over. The bad apples are gone. We can all go back to our glutenious lives of playing on the internet, watching porn, playing Doom, and cleaning our guns.
Slashdot Mirror
Funny... ON the issues that bug me the most, mainly dealing with taxes and how much money to throw at whom, I generally think of the two parties as extreem far left wing and far left wing.
But what do I know?
Quack
I can't believe this. I jump thru every hoop, dotted every i, crossed every t. I was told by two different brokers I was in.
Then, after the stock was trading in the 40s, I called Etrade to confirm I had RHAT. They said, sorry, we are still allocating the stock. We won't be able to tell you until later. What!?!?! Waiting until after the stock goes up three fold the allocate? That means if RHAT goes up, allocate it to friends. If RHAT goes down, allocate to suckers.
Then I find out that I didn't get my allocation. I'm pissed.
This is utter Bullshit.
Quack
I can't believe we were able to do all that in the 20 minute window. I wish they would post procedures somewhere so people don't get screwed when they don't realize they need to operate with a very real sense of urgency.
All this leads me to believe there is some real money that wanted in that RHAT and E*Trade didn't have the shares for. So they pulled this stunt to disqualify as many people as they could to make room for the Big Money(Tm).
Now I just hope the stock goes to 115 today! *smile*
Quack
What gives here? Pepsi said they would come up with a Harrier if the guy bought enough pepsi. He held up his side of the agreement. Pepsi backing out is paramount to Fraud.
If Pepsi can claim, what reasonable person would have believed we could actually deliever what we advertise, then what is to stop Intel from selling a PIII 1 Ghz that can only run at 233 Mhz? They could come back and say, who really believes a computer can go 1 Ghz.
I don't like marketers who fluff. It is not always possible to tell what is fluff and what is real. Everytime a marketer makes a claim or a promise they can not hold up to, they should lose money, or even thier job.
But that is only my thought. Yours is probably different.
Quack
I can see all the benifiets MS will get out of this site.
1) Noone breaks in. Claim the most secure 0S in the world.
2) People break in, MS fixes the bugs, downplays the seurity risk, and makes money off of a better product.
What do the crackers get?
1) They don't break in, Nothing.
2) If they break in, Nothing.
Humm... What a deal.
Who is going to waste thier time trying to get into a system they have no idea whats behind? Where are the security holes? I would hope MS has fixed all the Known problems. And until they release thier software, it will be hard to see what new is broken.
Quack
Wow... I just had a spiritual experience.
After reading the message intended for the Chinese masses, I must confess I have seen the light and must repent. It is time for me to delete the 10 gigs of MP3s I have downloaded from the web.
However, a new Quandary now arises. What do I do with the 10 gigs of MP3s I've made from my own music collection? Since I use legally obtained software that uses a pirated algorithm (Which IMHO should not be patented) I'm confused if I've seen enough light to delete them too? I think not.
And since it's going to be too hard to figure out which songs are in which category... I think I shall have to turn off the light again and live in blissful ignorance and with great Music!
Power to the Music!
Quack
from Katz (quoting a commerce department study):
Ownership of computers is still closely linked to income. Families with incomes over $75,000 were more than five times as likely to own a computer at home and 10 times more likely to have Net access than families who earned less than $10,000.
Well Duh!!!
Humm... Let's compare other things between family's who make greater than 75K vs less than 10K.
Which group owns more cars?
Which group owns more houses?
Which group owns more model trains?
Which group owns more beer?
My point is, 10K is well below poverty. They don't own stuff. It makes no point comparing them to the top 10% of the country.
Quack
The K7 is finally out. This is great news. I was going to buy a K6-3 but decieded to wait for the K7 because it was so close.
But the question now is: When do we see good motherboards with decent chipsets? Until then, the CPU is pretty much worthless to me.
Any thoughts?
Quack
Maybe I'm blind to the hype, but I have yet to see Lucas hype the movie. Everything I see is Pepsi Co trying to profit off the movies popularity. And this is not limited to just Pepsi Co. All the news shows are showing the trailers hopeing people will watch their shows for ratings. The magazines put the movie on their covers to sell more copies. Toys-R-Us has but out Billions and Billions of toys hoping to sell them. The hype is not there. However, the profiteering defenitly is.
Interesting point. The problem is I don't concider the execution of a murderer, murder. I've always wondered why we force ourselves to use a different moral code on murders than they do on their victims. I.e., they don't think it is wrong to kill, so why should you think it is wrong to kill them? Just a thought.
Anyways, common belief is that statistics indicate almost 80 percent of the crime is commited by only 20 percent of the criminals. I don't know how true this figure is, but I've often heard it quoted by the media. If this is true, and we execute the 20 percent of the people commiting 80 percent of the crime, we will all live in a much happier place. The main faliacy to this argument is once you get rid of 80 percent of the crime there will be a lot of unemployed lawyers looking for someone to sue. It just might be better to allow them to be tied up in the criminal system rather than unlease them on the civil system.
quack1701
You think? The last I checked, the repeat offense level for people who are put to death is Zero.
quack1701
He hasn't killed anyone...
quack1701
Once again something bad has happened and the press is trying to blame everyone/everything except the killers themselves.
At first I heard the attack was racially motivated. Give me a break, only one of their victims was a minority. That is unless you think student atheletes are a minority?
Then they want to blame the internet, guns, porn, gothic clothing. It sounds to me like they are grasping at straws and attacking all the standard media scapegoats. Why can't they just report the kids where crazy. It was the kids fault. Maybe it was the parents fault. The police found bomb making supplies at the house of one of the kids. Either the kids were doing a good job of hiding this, or the parents where turning a blind eye to what was going on.
I say it is finally time for us to accept there are bad apples out there. And when we find them we should punish/eraticate them. Sure, some (but by all means not most) of them may have turned bad because of the internet, or porn, or Doom, or something. However, these are activities that 99.999 percent of the people in the country can enjoy without going crazy so why punish the majority of the public for fear of "saving" one?
The only good thing about this attack was the killers killed themselves. Sure, now we will never know why they did this. Who cares. We don't have to "protect" them for the next 20 years while we "enslave" them. We don't have to hear the arguments in 20 years that they have reformed and should be let go. We don't have to follow their media-frenzied trial for the next year. We don't have to pay for all this. Its over. The bad apples are gone. We can all go back to our glutenious lives of playing on the internet, watching porn, playing Doom, and cleaning our guns.
quack1701