I never got the deal with why `sudo bash` is bad. It doesn't stop sone from doing something bad, and in this case, I'll just sudo vi and then:!bash from there. Nice an obscured.
You must have read that in Encarta! (Damn I wish I could find the link to when after Encarta was bought by Microsoft, edited the Bill Gates entry to say that he was famous for being a philanthropist instead of a brutal buisness man.)
Sure it's 525 children, but how many children have been recovered WITHOUT Amber Alert? That's the real question. Unless it's statistically significant, you are literally just as effective doing nothing. Actually, we already know this answer, and it's Amber Alert does nothing.
So we failed to reject the null hypothesis (that Amber Alerts are no more effective than not having Amber Alert). This that means that an effective Amber Alert needs to do something different from what they're already doing. Unfortunately, this announcement is just more of the same failed strategy. Think about it. I'm sitting at home, or perhaps at work. I check FB and see an amber alert. Now what? The roadside light signs at least catch people on the road telling them to look for a specific car. Alright. I can do that. I'm on the road. I can look for that. But when I get the Facebook Amber Alert, I'm not on the road. I'm at the computer. Oh sure, I could fish my phone out of my pocket if I happen to have a smartphone with push notifications enabled. and what not. But I doubt I'd bother, especially given the large number of status updates that the FB newsfeed pushes. So instead, when I get a chance, perhaps at lunch, or at home, I dig out my phone, go through the updates, and see that three hours ago, I should have looked for some car. And let's be honest about what "looking" means in this case. It means looking up from my Big Mac and staring out the nearest window for perhaps two seconds. It's not combing the neighborhood for hours, people just don't do that. They want to feel like they're helping, but not actually DO anything to actually help.
A Democrat congresswoman is shot, and a federal judge and 8 others are killed. This would be shocking, except that it's not. The congresswoman "beat back a tough challenge from a Tea Party-endorsed opponent."
So we have organization that promotes having its supporters brandish weapons at its rallies, has its most prominatent supporters openly talk about advocate armed rebellion, and armed secession, and other defunct 19th century extremist ideas, demonizing a duly elected political opponent, and now we have her shot, and 9 others killed.
And that's a perfectly reasonable position, but that's not what is being discussed here. What's being discussed is that some are objecting to the fact that getting a warrant from a judge would not be much faster than it is today. Instead of sitting on the side of the road for an hour or two, it's a couple of minutes.
What you're objecting to is that the alternative to a breathalyzer is blood test, which you claim is administered non-medical personnel. If the sample was taken by an nurse would you still object? Allowing additional tests and changing blood draw protocols are both trivial to change.
What makes you think he's not impartial? The cop says, "I think he's impaired. I smell alcohol on his breath and clothes." The judge says, "Yeah, that's enough for a warrant. I smell it from here."
This is EXACTLY how the system should work. Do you honestly think that you can just drive off when you say, "No, get a warrant."? The cops detain you until they present their case to the judge and get a response. They don't search you. They hold you under the centuries old common law precident that if they allow the suspect to leave, there is a reasonable belief that either the suspect will be difficult to subsequently recapture, and/or incriminating evidence will be destroyed.
I think you have a good point. The Federal government should leave the states to do more. The situation in California is particularly dire. We have fairly progressive government but the budget is seriously constrained. The Federal government takes much more in taxes from California than it returns (to the tune of about 30 billion dollars a year). If California could keep this money, we would have a state budget surplus and could fully fund education, roads, health care, etc.
California's problems are self induced. It has a stagnant legislature ironically dominated by a 34% intransigent minority of Republicans that oppose everything en masse. You have constitutional requirement for 2/3s vote to pass any budget and to raise any taxes. Couple this with a sacrosanct initiative system that locks up 2/3s of the budget so priorities can't be readjusted.
California needs to grow up, and raise taxes and cut budgets.
. But being in the military ins't a right. Midgets could probably help the military out in lots of ways (besides entertainment) but they can't join.
So the question is why shouldn't homosexuals serve openly, given that they're already serving. Lt. Dan Choi is gay and served and announced that he will soon serve again as an Arabic linguist. Why shouldn't he? Name one reason that would cast doubt on his effectiveness?
It would put someone else at unease? Well that's what they said about having blacks serve along side whites, and you know what? It didn't happen. The bigots left.
Mostly its the fact its being pushed during war that bothers the shit out of me.
You have an interesting definition of "pushed." Repeal has been talked about and repeatedly studied for at least 10 years now. It was slow walked for as long it could be.
He could have just ordered it - the commander in chief has that authority - but doing do might have just resulted in his successor countermanding the order.
Well given that it would have been after eight uneventful years of gays serving openly, how like do you think that would be? Ike didn't countermand Truman's desegregation order.
Its not much of a thought. DADT was implemented because nothing was in the books, so it became an issue when individuals had (for lack of better terms) issues.
No. DADT came about because Clinton wanted to repeal the ban, (Homosexuals were considered security threat because they could be blackmailed into spying. How openly homosexual soldiers could be blackmailed on being gay, was never clear.) and there was push back because of fear that "sodomites" would try to rape straight soldiers while taking refuge from artillery barages in fox holes and whatnot. And really, what red blooded straight American boy with bulging muscles can resist the sailor from the Village People?
It was a compromise because bigots wanted to stay bigots. Clinton should have just pulled a Truman and ordered it.
This has got to be one of the stupidest moves they could make. Make and repeal all the laws you want, but there's no getting around the fact that there are some people that just hate gays.
True, but that doesn't mean bigotry should be tolerated.
That was to prevent being discriminated against by the people you work with in the potentially-life-endangering industry of violence and death that is the military.
But that's not what actually happened. Someone would find out who was gay, and then harass that person mercilessly because they knew their victim had no recourse without outing themselves. The record is actually pretty clear on this fact. In 17 years, DADT was an abject failure on all counts.
Yes, those are appropriate screenshots, but I stand by my statement that the film is overly difficult to discern what is happening on the screen in any live action seen.
It's pretty damn sad a 7 year old thinks, "They're just throwing around computer terms. This is lame." (Hey Bit! I'm looking right at you!)
That's interesting that you said that it's effects held up well. I guess that's true in a sense. I remember when Tron came out, and I thought then, what I think now about it. It is a litterally an unwatchable movie. It's glowing blurs in pitch black. I always hated the faces in the movie. Blurry, and dark. Seriously. Look at this image of Tron.
OpenGL? "Lightweight"? Sure, I suppose because it's all implemented in the system, you don't have to redistribute much, but have you actually ever written anything remotely complicated in raw OpenGL? For anything resembling a GUI, the poster is going to spend months of writing low-level code that's been done a thousand times already.
Wha? GLUT and GLUI don't exist? Sure they're ugly as hell, but that's a different story.
DisplayPort is fine and all, but the adaptor to connect my macbook to my tv cost a small fortune, and it uses the headphone jack for optical audio, the displayport for video, and the usb port to power the adapter that converts it all to hdmi.
Or you could just get a dvi to hdmi connector for 10 bucks at Fry's
Slashdot Mirror
I never got the deal with why `sudo bash` is bad. It doesn't stop sone from doing something bad, and in this case, I'll just sudo vi and then :!bash from there. Nice an obscured.
You must have read that in Encarta! (Damn I wish I could find the link to when after Encarta was bought by Microsoft, edited the Bill Gates entry to say that he was famous for being a philanthropist instead of a brutal buisness man.)
We bail you out of from your greedy stupidity and this is your thank you? Looks like someone needs their corporate charter revoked.
Nah, the little people got used by the rich class as always. The real lesson from the economic collapse is that Marx was right.
Sure it's 525 children, but how many children have been recovered WITHOUT Amber Alert? That's the real question. Unless it's statistically significant, you are literally just as effective doing nothing. Actually, we already know this answer, and it's Amber Alert does nothing.
So we failed to reject the null hypothesis (that Amber Alerts are no more effective than not having Amber Alert). This that means that an effective Amber Alert needs to do something different from what they're already doing. Unfortunately, this announcement is just more of the same failed strategy. Think about it. I'm sitting at home, or perhaps at work. I check FB and see an amber alert. Now what? The roadside light signs at least catch people on the road telling them to look for a specific car. Alright. I can do that. I'm on the road. I can look for that. But when I get the Facebook Amber Alert, I'm not on the road. I'm at the computer. Oh sure, I could fish my phone out of my pocket if I happen to have a smartphone with push notifications enabled. and what not. But I doubt I'd bother, especially given the large number of status updates that the FB newsfeed pushes. So instead, when I get a chance, perhaps at lunch, or at home, I dig out my phone, go through the updates, and see that three hours ago, I should have looked for some car. And let's be honest about what "looking" means in this case. It means looking up from my Big Mac and staring out the nearest window for perhaps two seconds. It's not combing the neighborhood for hours, people just don't do that. They want to feel like they're helping, but not actually DO anything to actually help.
I can hear it now. Android is kicking so much iPhone ass, that Verizon clamoring for the iPhone just proves just how dead iPhone is!
*yawn*
Sorry fanboys. Unless you're getting a cut for every phone sold, marketshare doesn't to you. You're just that guy with a Zune tattoo.
Actually, the unnamed discredited 19th century idea I was was making a reference to was nullification.
A Democrat congresswoman is shot, and a federal judge and 8 others are killed. This would be shocking, except that it's not. The congresswoman "beat back a tough challenge from a Tea Party-endorsed opponent."
So we have organization that promotes having its supporters brandish weapons at its rallies, has its most prominatent supporters openly talk about advocate armed rebellion, and armed secession, and other defunct 19th century extremist ideas, demonizing a duly elected political opponent, and now we have her shot, and 9 others killed.
So Apple doesn't have a monopoly on smart phones? Shocking.
Don't worry everyone at the FEMA concentration camp is well trained by the WHO.
And that's a perfectly reasonable position, but that's not what is being discussed here. What's being discussed is that some are objecting to the fact that getting a warrant from a judge would not be much faster than it is today. Instead of sitting on the side of the road for an hour or two, it's a couple of minutes.
What you're objecting to is that the alternative to a breathalyzer is blood test, which you claim is administered non-medical personnel. If the sample was taken by an nurse would you still object? Allowing additional tests and changing blood draw protocols are both trivial to change.
What makes you think he's not impartial? The cop says, "I think he's impaired. I smell alcohol on his breath and clothes." The judge says, "Yeah, that's enough for a warrant. I smell it from here."
This is EXACTLY how the system should work. Do you honestly think that you can just drive off when you say, "No, get a warrant."? The cops detain you until they present their case to the judge and get a response. They don't search you. They hold you under the centuries old common law precident that if they allow the suspect to leave, there is a reasonable belief that either the suspect will be difficult to subsequently recapture, and/or incriminating evidence will be destroyed.
This is not a post-facto warrant.
I think you have a good point. The Federal government should leave the states to do more. The situation in California is particularly dire. We have fairly progressive government but the budget is seriously constrained. The Federal government takes much more in taxes from California than it returns (to the tune of about 30 billion dollars a year). If California could keep this money, we would have a state budget surplus and could fully fund education, roads, health care, etc.
California's problems are self induced. It has a stagnant legislature ironically dominated by a 34% intransigent minority of Republicans that oppose everything en masse. You have constitutional requirement for 2/3s vote to pass any budget and to raise any taxes. Couple this with a sacrosanct initiative system that locks up 2/3s of the budget so priorities can't be readjusted.
California needs to grow up, and raise taxes and cut budgets.
Being against DADT repeal means you're a bigot?
Yes.
. But being in the military ins't a right. Midgets could probably help the military out in lots of ways (besides entertainment) but they can't join.
So the question is why shouldn't homosexuals serve openly, given that they're already serving. Lt. Dan Choi is gay and served and announced that he will soon serve again as an Arabic linguist. Why shouldn't he? Name one reason that would cast doubt on his effectiveness?
It would put someone else at unease? Well that's what they said about having blacks serve along side whites, and you know what? It didn't happen. The bigots left.
Mostly its the fact its being pushed during war that bothers the shit out of me.
You have an interesting definition of "pushed." Repeal has been talked about and repeatedly studied for at least 10 years now. It was slow walked for as long it could be.
He could have just ordered it - the commander in chief has that authority - but doing do might have just resulted in his successor countermanding the order.
Well given that it would have been after eight uneventful years of gays serving openly, how like do you think that would be? Ike didn't countermand Truman's desegregation order.
Would that be the Democratic congress?
But kudos on taking the very pedantic view, and ignore that the President campaigned, and urged congress to pass the law, like EVERY PRESIDENT.
Its not much of a thought. DADT was implemented because nothing was in the books, so it became an issue when individuals had (for lack of better terms) issues.
No. DADT came about because Clinton wanted to repeal the ban, (Homosexuals were considered security threat because they could be blackmailed into spying. How openly homosexual soldiers could be blackmailed on being gay, was never clear.) and there was push back because of fear that "sodomites" would try to rape straight soldiers while taking refuge from artillery barages in fox holes and whatnot. And really, what red blooded straight American boy with bulging muscles can resist the sailor from the Village People?
It was a compromise because bigots wanted to stay bigots. Clinton should have just pulled a Truman and ordered it.
This has got to be one of the stupidest moves they could make. Make and repeal all the laws you want, but there's no getting around the fact that there are some people that just hate gays.
True, but that doesn't mean bigotry should be tolerated.
That was to prevent being discriminated against by the people you work with in the potentially-life-endangering industry of violence and death that is the military.
But that's not what actually happened. Someone would find out who was gay, and then harass that person mercilessly because they knew their victim had no recourse without outing themselves. The record is actually pretty clear on this fact. In 17 years, DADT was an abject failure on all counts.
Yes, those are appropriate screenshots, but I stand by my statement that the film is overly difficult to discern what is happening on the screen in any live action seen.
It's pretty damn sad a 7 year old thinks, "They're just throwing around computer terms. This is lame." (Hey Bit! I'm looking right at you!)
That's interesting that you said that it's effects held up well. I guess that's true in a sense. I remember when Tron came out, and I thought then, what I think now about it. It is a litterally an unwatchable movie. It's glowing blurs in pitch black. I always hated the faces in the movie. Blurry, and dark. Seriously. Look at this image of Tron.
For my next trick, I'll show how letting two gay men get married to each other shouldn't cause millions of straight people to get divorced.
Pshah! Everytime I read about queer marriage, I wonder why I got married. I only did it to flaunt it at homosexuals, and now I can't even do that.
What's the point anymore?
Congratulations, you've ignored the fact that populations aren't uniformily distributed.
Tell me this. Why does network speeds still suck in Manhattan?
Think Ferengi. Altruism is criminal, or insane, or both. Not turning a profit on any transaction is Against The Ferengi Way.
Grand Negus Ayn Rand couldn't have said it better.
Perferably moonwalk away after that spin.
OpenGL? "Lightweight"? Sure, I suppose because it's all implemented in the system, you don't have to redistribute much, but have you actually ever written anything remotely complicated in raw OpenGL? For anything resembling a GUI, the poster is going to spend months of writing low-level code that's been done a thousand times already.
Wha? GLUT and GLUI don't exist? Sure they're ugly as hell, but that's a different story.
DisplayPort is fine and all, but the adaptor to connect my macbook to my tv cost a small fortune, and it uses the headphone jack for optical audio, the displayport for video, and the usb port to power the adapter that converts it all to hdmi.
Or you could just get a dvi to hdmi connector for 10 bucks at Fry's