Then keep working. That's what retirement is- deciding not to work anymore and live off savings, because you prefer that lifestyle with less work and less money. Since you won't be bringing in a salary anymore, that means a lesser lifestyle money-wise. When that tradeoff is worth it is up to you.
That's not really true. Many people meet the retirement financial goals so they *don't* have to give up any of the lifestyle they prefer.
I still have a pretty good chance to make it. Some people are not content to settle for less.
B) Not even close to a millionaire, temporary or otherwise. I work for a living thank you very much.
Mmm, not to nitpick, but plenty of us who are millionaires also still work for a living. And some of us despair a little as we slide closer to retirement, knowing we will likely have to settle for a lesser lifestyle when we stop working.
Not other than, with. And with, using money from people like the Koch brothers, who are buying themselves legislation.
Were you being deliberately obtuse? Or are you just pleased that R's are successful at using state legislatures to control national policy with gerrymandering?
I think you missed the point. The R's have been working specifically to capture state legislatures, from which they can influence the makeup of Congress by gerrymandering. They're quite successful at it.
Ah, thank you, you do understand the point. You just don't care. I'm puzzled why you would still advocate for such destructive policies, but everyone has their own pathologies.
Good luck with that. Hope you don't have children.
I'm sure you're right. Government can print infinite money with no negative consequences down the line. The only reason everyone isn't a millionaire already is the greed of evil bankers. Why didn't anyone realize this before in all of history?
I mean, it's clear as day: you just spend more money that you make, and life is therefore better. I can see no flaw in this plan.
Your first response was reasonable, but now your sarcasm just demonstrates willful ignorance. You didn't think about what I wrote, did you? You're on the side of the shameless thieves who are willing to degrade U.S. infrastructure, ruin countless lives, and stunt the country's recovery, for what... to put a relatively small percentage of additional wealth into the pockets of the rich.
What they're doing is like the mugger who bashes in the head of someone who earns $100K per year for the $50 in his wallet. But hey, you're entitled to pick your friends.
The long-awaited runaway inflation is like cold fusion - it's coming, and we were wrong before (actually, they never admit this), but it's definitely coming.
The situation is not so much that honorable, well-meaning people are wrong in their predictions, but that they are a pack of craven fear mongers who are attempting to make the current inequities much worse, to the long-term detriment of the U.S., in order to provide their clients with more short term advantage.
No - it's not even a question. Bury the lines and you will remove a large number of causes for power outages.
Even more important - realize that each outage costs money for the community. In the long run buried lines will save money - even if you are in an area where the ground is filled with rocks.
Yeah, burying them removes some causes, and creates others. Put them underground, then ignore maintenance for a while, and you get outages due to flooding that you wouldn't have if the lines were on poles. No matter what you do, it comes down to maintenance - I do much prefer them underground, it makes the neighborhood much more attractive.
With the prospect of another wild winter, I'm getting a whole-house generator before Christmas. I put an addition on my house with an indoor pool, and 4-6 days without power in subfreezing weather could freeze the pipes. Also, it sucks to be without electricity in the winter.
I think the singularity is just some technology-wrapped new age bullshit.
The fact that you had to resort to fiction (and cheesy fiction at that) for your reference, instead of an applicable real life analogy, just shows that up.
It's being kept such a secret because the government doesn't want you to know the police are running these devices for the NSA. I can bet you that they are getting copies of anything these things vacuum up.
This is unnecessary paranoia. I'm sure you can bet police are sending copies of the data to the NSA, but I'm also sure you'd also wave goodbye to your money.
The police and the NSA have different agendas, and are unlikely to be interested in the same targets. The amount of overlap is probably so small that they just don't bother to ask. Your assumption that the police simply send everything they get to the NSA is tinfoil-hat territory. It would take too much effort to incorporate it into what the NSA is *actually* monitoring.
...certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it...
End of story. There can be no action taken by a government on behalf of its people argued to be for its people, yet conceal that action from its people in the name of its people. It's oxymoronic.
need to keep some things secret
Need to keep things secret? Who decides what is needed to be kept secret? Patriots? Those who stand with liberty and freedom certainly don't.
You are arguing that *nothing* should be kept secret from the people. Not the use of these devices by law enforcement, or the plans to go kill bin Laden, nuclear launch codes, etc.
If you claim you're not arguing that, then you *must* believe that *some* things should be kept secret, and if you do, I'll ask you who decides which things should be. You?
I love absolutist arguments like the one you made. You represent a "pure" view - really, *no* action can be taken by the government to benefit the people, and be kept secret? The fact is, you're in the same boat as the rest of us. This is far from the end of the story.
these extreme trolls are complex enough that they might mean something
i wonder what organization (and their PR wing) would be pissed that Slashdot published this story
it could be that if they can't keep it from being published then they systematically subvert it by putting racist/homophobic stuff as first post to make it obnoixious
in other words, sockpuppet griefers
Ah, thank goodness the core/. membership hasn't abandoned the site.
Why recognize that some people just like being assholes, when you can posit another paranoid conspiracy? Really, the conspiracies are more fun.
I do remember the state of s.f. on television in the 70's. Also every other medium in which s.f. was represented. Don't get me started, I'll tell you about being in Isaac Asimov's security entourage at conventions.
It really did suck. Lost in Space was cheesy, but deliberately so, and pretty campy. Much better than the original Battlestar.
No - the original Battlestar Galactica was real crap. Cheesy as all heck
I think you're really looking at the show unfairly. When it came on the air (over 36 years ago) there was nothing else like it on television.
I remember having friends over to see the first episode. I am a pretty uncritical consumer of space opera, and I said I thought it was pretty good. Two guys, two girls all looked at me like I was a retard.
I have to admit, it did suck pretty badly, even considering the state of s.f. television back then.
Well, I won't wish a federal grand jury on anyone. It's one day a week... for 18 months. And they extend most of the juries to a full 2 years.
On the other hand, my jury occasionally finds flaws in the US attorneys' cases, and make them fix them. Eventually we'll get a case so fucked up that we'll tell them, "no, in fact, we're *not* giving you this indictment." That will be a good day.
You're trying to obfuscate, but the fact is you're still advocating taking away basic constitutional rights, when the science shows that for the cases we see in the U.S., there's no benefit, other than placating ignorant fools like you.
If Branson were still young enough and had the time, and were qualified, I'm sure he'd test his own ships. He does have the nerve to risk his own life. Your comment seemed to criticize him for lacking the balls. He's got giant balls. What he has little of is time.
Slashdot Mirror
Then keep working. That's what retirement is- deciding not to work anymore and live off savings, because you prefer that lifestyle with less work and less money. Since you won't be bringing in a salary anymore, that means a lesser lifestyle money-wise. When that tradeoff is worth it is up to you.
That's not really true. Many people meet the retirement financial goals so they *don't* have to give up any of the lifestyle they prefer.
I still have a pretty good chance to make it. Some people are not content to settle for less.
B) Not even close to a millionaire, temporary or otherwise. I work for a living thank you very much.
Mmm, not to nitpick, but plenty of us who are millionaires also still work for a living. And some of us despair a little as we slide closer to retirement, knowing we will likely have to settle for a lesser lifestyle when we stop working.
There will be friggin' Ewok porn.
There's Ewok porn *now*.
Sadly, I don't have time to read that. But hey, Washington Times? Must be true.
Not other than, with. And with, using money from people like the Koch brothers, who are buying themselves legislation.
Were you being deliberately obtuse? Or are you just pleased that R's are successful at using state legislatures to control national policy with gerrymandering?
100 maps isn't statistically significant..
...Being democrat is a statistical anomaly that tends to plague habitants of big, corrupt cities...
...and this. You are both ignorant of statistics, and a loon.
I think you missed the point. The R's have been working specifically to capture state legislatures, from which they can influence the makeup of Congress by gerrymandering. They're quite successful at it.
Ah, thank you, you do understand the point. You just don't care. I'm puzzled why you would still advocate for such destructive policies, but everyone has their own pathologies.
Good luck with that. Hope you don't have children.
I'm sure you're right. Government can print infinite money with no negative consequences down the line. The only reason everyone isn't a millionaire already is the greed of evil bankers. Why didn't anyone realize this before in all of history?
I mean, it's clear as day: you just spend more money that you make, and life is therefore better. I can see no flaw in this plan.
Your first response was reasonable, but now your sarcasm just demonstrates willful ignorance. You didn't think about what I wrote, did you? You're on the side of the shameless thieves who are willing to degrade U.S. infrastructure, ruin countless lives, and stunt the country's recovery, for what... to put a relatively small percentage of additional wealth into the pockets of the rich.
What they're doing is like the mugger who bashes in the head of someone who earns $100K per year for the $50 in his wallet. But hey, you're entitled to pick your friends.
The long-awaited runaway inflation is like cold fusion - it's coming, and we were wrong before (actually, they never admit this), but it's definitely coming.
The situation is not so much that honorable, well-meaning people are wrong in their predictions, but that they are a pack of craven fear mongers who are attempting to make the current inequities much worse, to the long-term detriment of the U.S., in order to provide their clients with more short term advantage.
Is the string of experts saying how wrong they were after the fact.
Well, they're one up on the austerity fetishists who have been predicting runaway inflation for the last 8 years unless we slash government spending.
I say everyone just blockade west Africa. Nobody goes in or comes out and let the problem resolve itself.
Funny, the rest of the world is starting to say that about the U.S.
No - it's not even a question. Bury the lines and you will remove a large number of causes for power outages.
Even more important - realize that each outage costs money for the community. In the long run buried lines will save money - even if you are in an area where the ground is filled with rocks.
Yeah, burying them removes some causes, and creates others. Put them underground, then ignore maintenance for a while, and you get outages due to flooding that you wouldn't have if the lines were on poles. No matter what you do, it comes down to maintenance - I do much prefer them underground, it makes the neighborhood much more attractive.
With the prospect of another wild winter, I'm getting a whole-house generator before Christmas. I put an addition on my house with an indoor pool, and 4-6 days without power in subfreezing weather could freeze the pipes. Also, it sucks to be without electricity in the winter.
I think the first /. uid I abandoned was 5 digit.
But that's not the point. The point is you said something reeeaaallly stupid, and I made fun of you.
Deal with it.
I think the singularity is just some technology-wrapped new age bullshit.
The fact that you had to resort to fiction (and cheesy fiction at that) for your reference, instead of an applicable real life analogy, just shows that up.
It's being kept such a secret because the government doesn't want you to know the police are running these devices for the NSA. I can bet you that they are getting copies of anything these things vacuum up.
This is unnecessary paranoia. I'm sure you can bet police are sending copies of the data to the NSA, but I'm also sure you'd also wave goodbye to your money.
The police and the NSA have different agendas, and are unlikely to be interested in the same targets. The amount of overlap is probably so small that they just don't bother to ask. Your assumption that the police simply send everything they get to the NSA is tinfoil-hat territory. It would take too much effort to incorporate it into what the NSA is *actually* monitoring.
...certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it ...
End of story. There can be no action taken by a government on behalf of its people argued to be for its people, yet conceal that action from its people in the name of its people. It's oxymoronic.
need to keep some things secret
Need to keep things secret? Who decides what is needed to be kept secret? Patriots? Those who stand with liberty and freedom certainly don't.
You are arguing that *nothing* should be kept secret from the people. Not the use of these devices by law enforcement, or the plans to go kill bin Laden, nuclear launch codes, etc.
If you claim you're not arguing that, then you *must* believe that *some* things should be kept secret, and if you do, I'll ask you who decides which things should be. You?
I love absolutist arguments like the one you made. You represent a "pure" view - really, *no* action can be taken by the government to benefit the people, and be kept secret? The fact is, you're in the same boat as the rest of us. This is far from the end of the story.
these extreme trolls are complex enough that they might mean something
i wonder what organization (and their PR wing) would be pissed that Slashdot published this story
it could be that if they can't keep it from being published then they systematically subvert it by putting racist/homophobic stuff as first post to make it obnoixious
in other words, sockpuppet griefers
Ah, thank goodness the core /. membership hasn't abandoned the site.
Why recognize that some people just like being assholes, when you can posit another paranoid conspiracy? Really, the conspiracies are more fun.
I do remember the state of s.f. on television in the 70's. Also every other medium in which s.f. was represented. Don't get me started, I'll tell you about being in Isaac Asimov's security entourage at conventions.
It really did suck. Lost in Space was cheesy, but deliberately so, and pretty campy. Much better than the original Battlestar.
No - the original Battlestar Galactica was real crap. Cheesy as all heck
I think you're really looking at the show unfairly. When it came on the air (over 36 years ago) there was nothing else like it on television.
I remember having friends over to see the first episode. I am a pretty uncritical consumer of space opera, and I said I thought it was pretty good. Two guys, two girls all looked at me like I was a retard.
I have to admit, it did suck pretty badly, even considering the state of s.f. television back then.
Not too soon. Gilbert Gottfried was fucking funny less than a month after 9/11.
Yours wasn't funny, is all.
Well, I won't wish a federal grand jury on anyone. It's one day a week... for 18 months. And they extend most of the juries to a full 2 years.
On the other hand, my jury occasionally finds flaws in the US attorneys' cases, and make them fix them. Eventually we'll get a case so fucked up that we'll tell them, "no, in fact, we're *not* giving you this indictment." That will be a good day.
Ooh! Ooh! I'm a grand juror in that federal district. Maybe I'll get to hear the testimony and vote whether to indict.
You're trying to obfuscate, but the fact is you're still advocating taking away basic constitutional rights, when the science shows that for the cases we see in the U.S., there's no benefit, other than placating ignorant fools like you.
sumdumass, indeed.
If Branson were still young enough and had the time, and were qualified, I'm sure he'd test his own ships. He does have the nerve to risk his own life. Your comment seemed to criticize him for lacking the balls. He's got giant balls. What he has little of is time.