"The government" is made up of the people. You conservatives treat it as it's some omnipotent being in the sky. You're expectation that it will fail ends up being a self fulfilling prophecy. Reagan's proclamation that government is the problem was one of the worst things to happen to this country in the last half century. Half of the population has been conditioned to accept government failure as the norm.
WinMo reserves RAM for a "page pool", which I'm assuming is virtual memory. One of the problems with T-Mobile's original ROM is that they set the page pool size to a ridiculously large size (20MB I think), which sucked up way too much RAM. I do know that Windows mobile does *not* support the use disk to swap out RAM, so all virtual memory has to be in RAM.
Given what I know, I do think that Windows mobile's management of virtual memory blows. It would seem to me that a modern phone OS should be smart enough to manage virtual memory on it's own.
We'll just have to agree to slightly disagree on the censorship issue. I understand the opinion vs fact argument. I just don't see why it's so hard to tell between the two. I agree with Micheal Moore on 9/10 things, but if what you said about the rockets is true, then what he said was, by my definition a lie.
Regarding health care, the root of our health care problem is the profit motive. It's what makes our health care costs so much higher than every other country.
Health care in this country is treated like a utility (everyone *must* have it) yet it is regulated like a commodity. Anytime you don't heavily regulate or nationalize a utility (something that everyone must have) price gouging happens. It's human nature. Watch the movie "Enron: The Smartest guys in the Room" for an great example of what happens when you don't regulate a utility properly. Billions of dollars were stolen from the state of California and placed into the pockets of Enron investors and CEOs as a result of deregulation.
My experience is that the phone vendor can really make windows mobile look bad. My first windows mobile phone was a t-mobile wing. The wing had a 200mhz OMAP processor and only 64MB of RAM. With the default T-mobile wing ROM (which was window mobile 6.0) you would have only 12MB of RAM free after booting up. With the default software the phone would constantly freeze and run out of RAM almost immediately. Then I found Xda-developers.com and learned how to make my own ROM. I made my own ROM for the wing. The difference was night and day. With the custom ROMs I built I had between 18-25MB of free RAM instead of 12MB and the phone went from requiring a reset every day to almost *never* needing one. My ROM had very few fixes for Windows mobile. It just lacked all of the useless crap that T-Mobile packed into their ROM.
If what he claimed is a lie, then it should not be allowed. False propaganda is wrong no matter who partakes in it.
And regarding NPR, were they lying? If not, then why are you bringing it up? I don't care about your perceived bias. I care about people lying in order to further their own cause. When a financial transaction is involved, it's called fraud and people go to jail. When important political issues are involved, it suddenly becomes okay to deceive people to further your own interests.
I understand your point of view. I'm just saddened by the ignorance of our populace some times. I live in an extremely conservative area of the country, and the hate I see directed towards various out groups is disheartening.
I would love to read about the legislator who was jailed. I searched and found a few articles about various people jailed for hate speech in Europe, but nothing specifically from Britain.
Given that several rulings since Schenck vs United States have changed the interpretation of the first amendment, rather than amending our constitution, there is also the possibility of amending our interpretation of the constitution.
So you think there should be no limits on speech, regardless of the possible repercussions of that speech? Do you disagree with the "fire in a crowded theater" opinion by the SCOTUS?
You don't extinguish evil ideas by banning them, you extinguish them with counter-argument and facts.
Let me be clear that I'm specifically talking about limiting the speech of those who have control over mass media communication channels. I agree that counter argument and facts are the best way to fight bad ideas, but counter arguments and facts are useless when one party has no effective method of rebutting the arguments.
I don't recall claiming that it does. Care to point out which passage of mine that you think makes that claim?
The SCOTUS has already ruled that speech meant to incite civil unrest is not protected under the first amendment. Given that, and the fact that the first amendment was specifically aimed at the press, I don't see the limiting speech on the airwaves that is intended to incite hatred or violence goes againsts our laws.
Only a fool believes that censorship leads to freedom.
Again, you make a statement addressing something which I did not say.
Every law in existence is in effect, censorship. Only a fool believes that all censorship is harmful to society.
Opinions should be allowed. Lies stated as if they were facts to back up those opinions, and hate speech should not be. In many countries more civilized that the United States, many of the people that we have on the air would not be allowed on the airwaves.
Discrimination laws only seem to be applicable to "minorities" (in quotes because they aren't always really in the minority). If you are a white guy of European ancestry with your own church then you are pretty much on your own because you don't have lobbyist groups and mouthpieces on CNN fighting for your cause.....I am for equal treatment of everyone.
There are political minorities and there are numerical minorities. You are putting too much emphasis on the latter.
My original snark had to do with the fact that this subject is very personal to me.
I was a late talker. My mom says that I wasn't able to form a sentence until I was about three years old, so it isn't a surprise to me that both of my sons and now my daughter are all late talkers. My oldest, which happens to look like a my little clone, seems to have inherited my late speech development, combined with my wife's speech articulation problems (she needed speech from 1st through 5th grade), and result has been a bunch of armchair experts (teachers/relatives/strangers on the street) throwing out the "autistic" label at my son since he was two years old.
It is very hurtful when your son is called retarded by people who know nothing about him.
My oldest just started kindergarten and, just like I did, he is having "behavior problems". By behavior problems, I mean he doesn't want to sit down and write the letter "J" twenty times in a row, because he learned how to write the entire alphabet along with dozens of words between the age of two and three. In the last few months, he's been on this kick of trying to teach himself to read and do basic arithmetic. All we've done is try to provide him with the tools and answer his questions (he's fiercely independent) and he's taken it from there.
I live in a extremely conservative area of the country (tea party country) and I have to wonder if this is a factor in how my son's school operates. In my sons class, they shuffle the kids around to "stations" where they perform activities and only give them a few minutes in each station, never really allowing them to get involved with anything. It reminds me of a factory assembly line and I have to wonder weather they are trying to educate our children or teach them to be thoughtless drones. The school has brought up the idea of placing my son in a special education class, which horrifies us because we want him to be able to have social interaction with normal children.
Anyway, I bring up my sons school and his problems because your quote...
In the future, as we study them, we will surely subdivide even more. The hope is that at some point, we will be able to help each child develop in the way that is best for them. That is the point.
...is what I hope for. Unfortunately, for children like my son, that time is not here, and in the meantime he's being grouped together children who have real DDs and need real help.
I don't appreciate words being put into my mouth. I never claimed that nothing was ever wrong with people. I was specifically ranting about "PDD-NOS". My wife is a graduate student and some of her friends at college have admitted to her that they use it as a blanket diagnosis for kids whom they can't fit into any other category. The reason is that the more kids they have "labeled", the better it looks on the grant application. These friends of hers were also getting their tuition paid by the same grant money.
Besides the PDD-NOS bullshit, autism diagnoses seem to have skyrocketed in the last decade and after hearing four of the dozen or so mothers claim that their sons were "autistic" at the last birthday party my son went to, I have to question to validity of many of the diagnoses. I fail to see how diagnosing kids who are simply quirky or slightly imbalanced as being autistic helps kids who really need help.
Besides my wife being a graduate student, my mother and uncle are college professors, my grandmother was a teacher and life-long hospital and school volunteer and my aunt is a nurse, so I'll call your FUCK YOU and raise you another one, you judgmental, overly defensive, asshole.
I'm pretty sure that the author meant for "Communication with peers" to be an item. After reading it a couple of times, I can see how it can be read the other way.
It took two to tango in the late 1990's, as the Repubs had a majority on congress during that time. Deregulation was the thing to do in the 90's. Everyone was partaking in the deregulation kool-aid.
Sales taxes are usually not a fair way to raise revenue. They always affect one portion of the population more than another, and in almost every case, the poor are the ones who get the biggest chunk of their money taken way. Progressive income taxes and property taxes are a much fairer way to raise revenue.
I find it ironic that both ends of the political spectrum support unfair taxation.
Conservatives support "fair"/flat tax schemes, which are regressive and end up screwing the middle to lower middle classes at the expense of the mega rich, and liberals support various sales tax schemes (cigarettes, alcohol, candy, soda, fuel, energy, air) which are almost invariably regressive too.
Slashdot Mirror
"The government" is made up of the people. You conservatives treat it as it's some omnipotent being in the sky. You're expectation that it will fail ends up being a self fulfilling prophecy. Reagan's proclamation that government is the problem was one of the worst things to happen to this country in the last half century. Half of the population has been conditioned to accept government failure as the norm.
WinMo reserves RAM for a "page pool", which I'm assuming is virtual memory. One of the problems with T-Mobile's original ROM is that they set the page pool size to a ridiculously large size (20MB I think), which sucked up way too much RAM. I do know that Windows mobile does *not* support the use disk to swap out RAM, so all virtual memory has to be in RAM.
Given what I know, I do think that Windows mobile's management of virtual memory blows. It would seem to me that a modern phone OS should be smart enough to manage virtual memory on it's own.
We'll just have to agree to slightly disagree on the censorship issue. I understand the opinion vs fact argument. I just don't see why it's so hard to tell between the two. I agree with Micheal Moore on 9/10 things, but if what you said about the rockets is true, then what he said was, by my definition a lie.
Regarding health care, the root of our health care problem is the profit motive. It's what makes our health care costs so much higher than every other country.
Health care in this country is treated like a utility (everyone *must* have it) yet it is regulated like a commodity. Anytime you don't heavily regulate or nationalize a utility (something that everyone must have) price gouging happens. It's human nature. Watch the movie "Enron: The Smartest guys in the Room" for an great example of what happens when you don't regulate a utility properly. Billions of dollars were stolen from the state of California and placed into the pockets of Enron investors and CEOs as a result of deregulation.
My experience is that the phone vendor can really make windows mobile look bad. My first windows mobile phone was a t-mobile wing. The wing had a 200mhz OMAP processor and only 64MB of RAM. With the default T-mobile wing ROM (which was window mobile 6.0) you would have only 12MB of RAM free after booting up. With the default software the phone would constantly freeze and run out of RAM almost immediately. Then I found Xda-developers.com and learned how to make my own ROM. I made my own ROM for the wing. The difference was night and day. With the custom ROMs I built I had between 18-25MB of free RAM instead of 12MB and the phone went from requiring a reset every day to almost *never* needing one. My ROM had very few fixes for Windows mobile. It just lacked all of the useless crap that T-Mobile packed into their ROM.
If what he claimed is a lie, then it should not be allowed. False propaganda is wrong no matter who partakes in it.
And regarding NPR, were they lying? If not, then why are you bringing it up? I don't care about your perceived bias. I care about people lying in order to further their own cause. When a financial transaction is involved, it's called fraud and people go to jail. When important political issues are involved, it suddenly becomes okay to deceive people to further your own interests.
I understand your point of view. I'm just saddened by the ignorance of our populace some times. I live in an extremely conservative area of the country, and the hate I see directed towards various out groups is disheartening.
I would love to read about the legislator who was jailed. I searched and found a few articles about various people jailed for hate speech in Europe, but nothing specifically from Britain.
Given that several rulings since Schenck vs United States have changed the interpretation of the first amendment, rather than amending our constitution, there is also the possibility of amending our interpretation of the constitution.
So you think there should be no limits on speech, regardless of the possible repercussions of that speech? Do you disagree with the "fire in a crowded theater" opinion by the SCOTUS?
As I posted above, I'm not talking about bums on the street. I'm talking about bums with 50+ million captive audiences.
It certainly doesn't apply to some skinhead's racist rants, unless those rants were to insight a mob to injure people
See my post below about mass media. I was never talking about individuals on the street or even on the internet.
And for the record I think Germany's banning of Nazi imagery has long outlived it's usefulness.
You don't extinguish evil ideas by banning them, you extinguish them with counter-argument and facts.
Let me be clear that I'm specifically talking about limiting the speech of those who have control over mass media communication channels. I agree that counter argument and facts are the best way to fight bad ideas, but counter arguments and facts are useless when one party has no effective method of rebutting the arguments.
How does censoring hate speech stop hate??
I don't recall claiming that it does. Care to point out which passage of mine that you think makes that claim?
The SCOTUS has already ruled that speech meant to incite civil unrest is not protected under the first amendment. Given that, and the fact that the first amendment was specifically aimed at the press, I don't see the limiting speech on the airwaves that is intended to incite hatred or violence goes againsts our laws.
Only a fool believes that censorship leads to freedom.
Again, you make a statement addressing something which I did not say.
Every law in existence is in effect, censorship. Only a fool believes that all censorship is harmful to society.
Opinions should be allowed. Lies stated as if they were facts to back up those opinions, and hate speech should not be. In many countries more civilized that the United States, many of the people that we have on the air would not be allowed on the airwaves.
Discrimination laws only seem to be applicable to "minorities" (in quotes because they aren't always really in the minority). If you are a white guy of European ancestry with your own church then you are pretty much on your own because you don't have lobbyist groups and mouthpieces on CNN fighting for your cause.....I am for equal treatment of everyone.
There are political minorities and there are numerical minorities. You are putting too much emphasis on the latter.
My original snark had to do with the fact that this subject is very personal to me.
I was a late talker. My mom says that I wasn't able to form a sentence until I was about three years old, so it isn't a surprise to me that both of my sons and now my daughter are all late talkers. My oldest, which happens to look like a my little clone, seems to have inherited my late speech development, combined with my wife's speech articulation problems (she needed speech from 1st through 5th grade), and result has been a bunch of armchair experts (teachers/relatives/strangers on the street) throwing out the "autistic" label at my son since he was two years old.
It is very hurtful when your son is called retarded by people who know nothing about him.
My oldest just started kindergarten and, just like I did, he is having "behavior problems". By behavior problems, I mean he doesn't want to sit down and write the letter "J" twenty times in a row, because he learned how to write the entire alphabet along with dozens of words between the age of two and three. In the last few months, he's been on this kick of trying to teach himself to read and do basic arithmetic. All we've done is try to provide him with the tools and answer his questions (he's fiercely independent) and he's taken it from there.
I live in a extremely conservative area of the country (tea party country) and I have to wonder if this is a factor in how my son's school operates. In my sons class, they shuffle the kids around to "stations" where they perform activities and only give them a few minutes in each station, never really allowing them to get involved with anything. It reminds me of a factory assembly line and I have to wonder weather they are trying to educate our children or teach them to be thoughtless drones. The school has brought up the idea of placing my son in a special education class, which horrifies us because we want him to be able to have social interaction with normal children.
Anyway, I bring up my sons school and his problems because your quote...
In the future, as we study them, we will surely subdivide even more. The hope is that at some point, we will be able to help each child develop in the way that is best for them. That is the point.
...is what I hope for. Unfortunately, for children like my son, that time is not here, and in the meantime he's being grouped together children who have real DDs and need real help.
I don't appreciate words being put into my mouth. I never claimed that nothing was ever wrong with people. I was specifically ranting about "PDD-NOS". My wife is a graduate student and some of her friends at college have admitted to her that they use it as a blanket diagnosis for kids whom they can't fit into any other category. The reason is that the more kids they have "labeled", the better it looks on the grant application. These friends of hers were also getting their tuition paid by the same grant money.
Besides the PDD-NOS bullshit, autism diagnoses seem to have skyrocketed in the last decade and after hearing four of the dozen or so mothers claim that their sons were "autistic" at the last birthday party my son went to, I have to question to validity of many of the diagnoses. I fail to see how diagnosing kids who are simply quirky or slightly imbalanced as being autistic helps kids who really need help.
Besides my wife being a graduate student, my mother and uncle are college professors, my grandmother was a teacher and life-long hospital and school volunteer and my aunt is a nurse, so I'll call your FUCK YOU and raise you another one, you judgmental, overly defensive, asshole.
It's also been boosted by graduate programs at universities whose grant funding depends on the number of Autism, or "PDD-NOS"* cases they diagnose.
* Catch-all syndrome invented for the purposes of justifying more grant funding.
I'm pretty sure that the author meant for "Communication with peers" to be an item. After reading it a couple of times, I can see how it can be read the other way.
Google Voice?
It took two to tango in the late 1990's, as the Repubs had a majority on congress during that time. Deregulation was the thing to do in the 90's. Everyone was partaking in the deregulation kool-aid.
Some people don't have a bunch of extra rooms in their house you moron.
I can tell from your attitude that you either don't have kids, or your kids are incurious morons.
You were the one who made the original claim. Methinks it's you that should go to secunia and do the math.
So maybe Regan did one good thing.
"But I helped streamline the U.S. postal service!"
-- Ronald Reagan while being ushered through the gates of hell
Sales taxes are usually not a fair way to raise revenue. They always affect one portion of the population more than another, and in almost every case, the poor are the ones who get the biggest chunk of their money taken way. Progressive income taxes and property taxes are a much fairer way to raise revenue.
I find it ironic that both ends of the political spectrum support unfair taxation.
Conservatives support "fair"/flat tax schemes, which are regressive and end up screwing the middle to lower middle classes at the expense of the mega rich, and liberals support various sales tax schemes (cigarettes, alcohol, candy, soda, fuel, energy, air) which are almost invariably regressive too.
LOL at your ridiculous strawman.
I challenged someone to come up with malware that elevates privilege, and you present a site that sells hardware based keyloggers.
Your next challenge is explaining how having a separate computer from the kids will protect it from a hardware keylogger.