1 Vice President of the United States 2 Speaker of the House 3 President pro tempore of the Senate 4 Secretary of State 5 Secretary of the Treasury 6 Secretary of Defense 7 Attorney General — Secretary of the Interior 8 Secretary of Agriculture 9 Secretary of Commerce 10 Secretary of Labor 11 Secretary of Health and Human Services 12 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 13 Secretary of Transportation 14 Secretary of Energy 15 Secretary of Education 16 Secretary of Veterans Affairs 17 Secretary of Homeland Security
Just for context here. Clinton called himself the Black Sheep of the Bush family. And W. Bush called Hillary his step-sister when asked to talk about the possibility of Jeb facing Hillary.
Which theoretically would be the official State Department email servers. Anyway around it, the official email servers were more secure than Hillary's.
Of the four Sec. of States that were around for email usage in the White House (Clinton and earlier). Two did not use email, Albright and Rice. The only other Secretary of State that used email was Colin Powell. He's admitted that he used a personal account for at least some of his official business. His emails are lost he says. Remember though, he was Sec. of State between 2001 and 2005. The means all of his emails are at least 10 years old by now.
More importantly, what previous holders of the office did does not matter here. Why? For at least a couple reasons. First, the push in recent years is for transparency. If previous holders did actions that are considered bad under the need for transparency and record keeping then continuing what they're doing is not right. Arguing that the previous guy did it and saying that absolves you of responsibility is wrong. Second, And pay attention here, Clinton in '07 in a speech railed against "secret emails" of the Bush administration, calling it cronyism and corruption; and then saying more transparency is needed. It's incredibly hypocritical to talk about that and then do what Clinton did.
Because no one else within either party is allowed to run in their primaries right? Seriously people, there are other folks in these parties. I was quite a fan of Huntsman back in the '12 Republican primaries, but everytime I brought him up, the liberals said he wasn't liberal enough and the conservatives said he wasn't conservative enough. It's so laughable.
Go vote in primaries people!!! SERIOUSLY! Open primary states are the easiest. But if you're closed primary, register as Dem or Rep and go vote. I'm tired of all of your lazy asses whining about lack of choices when you won't engage in minimal effort.
But that's a whole different debate and not exclusive to the PC Master Race crowd, as console gamers also complain about excessive QTE and overly easy games (Order 1886 is a good recent example). There are dumb downed easy games on PC as well. It's not some phenomenon that's due to consoles. I hear the same bitching and moaning about the dumbing down for MMOs as well. I hear it for the new Diablo from veteran Diablo players who think the loot rates are stupid high compared to the older games. To some degree it's the, "back in my day...something something...fifteen feet of snow...something something...both ways!" argument.
I don't deny that the PC is the more powerful platform. What I'm talking about is the sentiment that PC elitists have that console gamers are not real or can't be hard/core gamers. Trying to associate the console gamer with the casual smartphone gamer. When the fact of the matter is that consoles were a big part of the initial evolution of video games.
Whenever a PC Master Race elitist comes in, I know they're not actually a gamer. Real gamers recognize that the gaming has roots in the arcades and consoles of 70s and 80s.
My XBOne can boot faster than my gaming PC most of the time (PC is booting off SSD). So I don't get the complaint. I don't have a PS4 yet so I can't attest to it's boot time.
Maybe because they had a bigger selling point. The I don't know highly destructible environments. Gamers who think games need to have the best graphics first and then everything else are just wastes of space.
No it wasn't. IBM for Z-Series and I-Series was involved in secure boot technology long before Intel and Microsoft were even part of it. Linux by the early 2000s had lots of secure boot advocates. As soon as Microsoft seriously planned to introduce secure boot they started working with Linux vendors like RedHat, Suse, HP... to make sure it would work with Linux.
So then suggesting that secular humanism is a better option based on your argument is incorrect. As no argument has established that racism would not find justifications under humanism or that religion causes racism. This, "religion has historically been used to justify racism more than fight against racism," does not support this, "so we are better off with some kind of secular humanism."
They have two clearly distinct user interfaces in Windows 10. So I don't understand why you're saying what you're saying.
I'm not seeing how we think it's impossible to allow enabling of the desktop user interface when the user has attached a keyboard, mouse, and monitor to the phone. Or when a touch screen is added that the metro user interface can be enabled. They're not mutually exclusive interfaces.
Abolitionists and the Civil Rights movements all reference religious ideology to justify their movements. I'm not sure you can claim that we're better off with secular humanism then. In fact, you wouldn't be, because the overt problems of racism (the ones you'd be implying were supported by religion) were caused because those people viewed other races as less human, i.e. animals. If you view another person as not being a human, then you being a "secular humanist" would not apply morality rules as if the other person was a human. You can own a dog (i.e. the dog is your property), because the dog is not a human. Similarly, if another person is not considered a human or less of a human, then they can be owned (i.e. your slave).
But before we debate that, can you please establish how religion causes racism.
Because they're giving away Win 10 to all Windows users for the first year supposedly. That'd be my biggest reason. Why pay later when I can get it free for now. Then the question becomes, why wouldn't you want to upgrade?
Besides that, I'd say because Windows 10 will allow greater portability of software between your devices (phone, console, tablet). Of course that assumes you have those. The other reason would be because of added features.
There are docking stations of other types. My droid 2 came with a docker that made it act like an alarm clock. So I have to assume the capability will be there or can be added later.
If you handle UI as sort of like a display property it shouldn't be an issue. And my understanding of reports on Win10 is that's kind of what they're doing. The 2 in one laptops will be able to switch between the two interfact types (metro/desktop).
The notion, I'm thinking of is being able to use these phones as a sort of thin client. Or like what offices do sometimes that have docking stations for laptops to make them more desktop like.
What part of that is not disparaging? In fact what hilariously left out of your quotes...
"It's a beautiful quote, but it was a character trait that was used to describe a group of Celtic immigrants — Scots-Irish people who came to the Americas who were running from political circumstances in the old world," Ste. Claire said. Those Scots-Irish folks started settling the Carolinas, and later moved deeper South and into Florida and Georgia.
But the disparaging term followed these immigrants , who were thought by local officials to be unruly and ill-mannered.
"In official documents, the governor of Florida said, 'We don't know what to do with these crackers — we tell them to settle this area and they don't; we tell them not to settle this area and they do," Ste. Claire said. "They lived off the land. They were rogues."
Those people used the term AFTER it was being used to insult them. They chose to try and appropriate the term to offset the insult. Kind of like owning an embarrassing nickname in school. Besides, Celts (Scots-Irish) = white people. They are Caucasian, yes. But not all white people are Celts.
The article in no way supports what you said.
You should look up the history of the term cracker before assuming that it is a disparaging remark.
When blacks use it, it means a bigoted white person; comparing the whites they're interacting with to the whites they dealt with during slavery. When a WASP uses it, it's meant to disparage Scots-Irish migrants to this country. When a Northerner uses it, it's comparing the person to oppressive slave owners.
Further, and this is really what matters, as person with Irish heritage, if someone called me a cracker, I'd find it offensive. I'm neither bigoted (or rather I don't try to be); I'm not unruly and ill-mannered; I've never been a slave owner; and no ancestors that I know of have either. More importantly, if I am, it's not because I'm white or of Irish descent.
Slashdot Mirror
We also have a President who lied (again depending on who you believe) and said he found out about it from the news.
Just so we're all clear:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U...
1 Vice President of the United States
2 Speaker of the House
3 President pro tempore of the Senate
4 Secretary of State
5 Secretary of the Treasury
6 Secretary of Defense
7 Attorney General
— Secretary of the Interior
8 Secretary of Agriculture
9 Secretary of Commerce
10 Secretary of Labor
11 Secretary of Health and Human Services
12 Secretary of Housing and Urban Development
13 Secretary of Transportation
14 Secretary of Energy
15 Secretary of Education
16 Secretary of Veterans Affairs
17 Secretary of Homeland Security
Just for context here. Clinton called himself the Black Sheep of the Bush family. And W. Bush called Hillary his step-sister when asked to talk about the possibility of Jeb facing Hillary.
Which theoretically would be the official State Department email servers. Anyway around it, the official email servers were more secure than Hillary's.
Of the four Sec. of States that were around for email usage in the White House (Clinton and earlier). Two did not use email, Albright and Rice. The only other Secretary of State that used email was Colin Powell. He's admitted that he used a personal account for at least some of his official business. His emails are lost he says. Remember though, he was Sec. of State between 2001 and 2005. The means all of his emails are at least 10 years old by now.
More importantly, what previous holders of the office did does not matter here. Why? For at least a couple reasons. First, the push in recent years is for transparency. If previous holders did actions that are considered bad under the need for transparency and record keeping then continuing what they're doing is not right. Arguing that the previous guy did it and saying that absolves you of responsibility is wrong. Second, And pay attention here, Clinton in '07 in a speech railed against "secret emails" of the Bush administration, calling it cronyism and corruption; and then saying more transparency is needed. It's incredibly hypocritical to talk about that and then do what Clinton did.
Because no one else within either party is allowed to run in their primaries right? Seriously people, there are other folks in these parties. I was quite a fan of Huntsman back in the '12 Republican primaries, but everytime I brought him up, the liberals said he wasn't liberal enough and the conservatives said he wasn't conservative enough. It's so laughable.
Go vote in primaries people!!! SERIOUSLY! Open primary states are the easiest. But if you're closed primary, register as Dem or Rep and go vote. I'm tired of all of your lazy asses whining about lack of choices when you won't engage in minimal effort.
Where do you think the water goes when it evaporates?
But that's a whole different debate and not exclusive to the PC Master Race crowd, as console gamers also complain about excessive QTE and overly easy games (Order 1886 is a good recent example). There are dumb downed easy games on PC as well. It's not some phenomenon that's due to consoles. I hear the same bitching and moaning about the dumbing down for MMOs as well. I hear it for the new Diablo from veteran Diablo players who think the loot rates are stupid high compared to the older games. To some degree it's the, "back in my day...something something...fifteen feet of snow...something something...both ways!" argument.
I don't deny that the PC is the more powerful platform. What I'm talking about is the sentiment that PC elitists have that console gamers are not real or can't be hard/core gamers. Trying to associate the console gamer with the casual smartphone gamer. When the fact of the matter is that consoles were a big part of the initial evolution of video games.
Whenever a PC Master Race elitist comes in, I know they're not actually a gamer. Real gamers recognize that the gaming has roots in the arcades and consoles of 70s and 80s.
If only I had mod points...
My XBOne can boot faster than my gaming PC most of the time (PC is booting off SSD). So I don't get the complaint. I don't have a PS4 yet so I can't attest to it's boot time.
Maybe because they had a bigger selling point. The I don't know highly destructible environments. Gamers who think games need to have the best graphics first and then everything else are just wastes of space.
By jbolden
No it wasn't. IBM for Z-Series and I-Series was involved in secure boot technology long before Intel and Microsoft were even part of it. Linux by the early 2000s had lots of secure boot advocates. As soon as Microsoft seriously planned to introduce secure boot they started working with Linux vendors like RedHat, Suse, HP... to make sure it would work with Linux.
Sounds like they did...
Because she's always sending emails to people with government accounts....right...
So then suggesting that secular humanism is a better option based on your argument is incorrect. As no argument has established that racism would not find justifications under humanism or that religion causes racism. This, "religion has historically been used to justify racism more than fight against racism," does not support this, "so we are better off with some kind of secular humanism."
Ironically, this statement makes you a bigot. :P
I thought the replicator used the crew's waste to do that stuff. Not energy.
They have two clearly distinct user interfaces in Windows 10. So I don't understand why you're saying what you're saying.
I'm not seeing how we think it's impossible to allow enabling of the desktop user interface when the user has attached a keyboard, mouse, and monitor to the phone. Or when a touch screen is added that the metro user interface can be enabled. They're not mutually exclusive interfaces.
Abolitionists and the Civil Rights movements all reference religious ideology to justify their movements. I'm not sure you can claim that we're better off with secular humanism then. In fact, you wouldn't be, because the overt problems of racism (the ones you'd be implying were supported by religion) were caused because those people viewed other races as less human, i.e. animals. If you view another person as not being a human, then you being a "secular humanist" would not apply morality rules as if the other person was a human. You can own a dog (i.e. the dog is your property), because the dog is not a human. Similarly, if another person is not considered a human or less of a human, then they can be owned (i.e. your slave).
But before we debate that, can you please establish how religion causes racism.
Because they're giving away Win 10 to all Windows users for the first year supposedly. That'd be my biggest reason. Why pay later when I can get it free for now. Then the question becomes, why wouldn't you want to upgrade?
Besides that, I'd say because Windows 10 will allow greater portability of software between your devices (phone, console, tablet). Of course that assumes you have those. The other reason would be because of added features.
There are docking stations of other types. My droid 2 came with a docker that made it act like an alarm clock. So I have to assume the capability will be there or can be added later.
If you handle UI as sort of like a display property it shouldn't be an issue. And my understanding of reports on Win10 is that's kind of what they're doing. The 2 in one laptops will be able to switch between the two interfact types (metro/desktop).
The notion, I'm thinking of is being able to use these phones as a sort of thin client. Or like what offices do sometimes that have docking stations for laptops to make them more desktop like.
a common insult for an obnoxious bloviator.
What part of that is not disparaging? In fact what hilariously left out of your quotes...
"It's a beautiful quote, but it was a character trait that was used to describe a group of Celtic immigrants — Scots-Irish people who came to the Americas who were running from political circumstances in the old world," Ste. Claire said. Those Scots-Irish folks started settling the Carolinas, and later moved deeper South and into Florida and Georgia.
But the disparaging term followed these immigrants , who were thought by local officials to be unruly and ill-mannered.
"In official documents, the governor of Florida said, 'We don't know what to do with these crackers — we tell them to settle this area and they don't; we tell them not to settle this area and they do," Ste. Claire said. "They lived off the land. They were rogues."
Those people used the term AFTER it was being used to insult them. They chose to try and appropriate the term to offset the insult. Kind of like owning an embarrassing nickname in school. Besides, Celts (Scots-Irish) = white people. They are Caucasian, yes. But not all white people are Celts.
The article in no way supports what you said.
You should look up the history of the term cracker before assuming that it is a disparaging remark.
When blacks use it, it means a bigoted white person; comparing the whites they're interacting with to the whites they dealt with during slavery. When a WASP uses it, it's meant to disparage Scots-Irish migrants to this country. When a Northerner uses it, it's comparing the person to oppressive slave owners.
Further, and this is really what matters, as person with Irish heritage, if someone called me a cracker, I'd find it offensive. I'm neither bigoted (or rather I don't try to be); I'm not unruly and ill-mannered; I've never been a slave owner; and no ancestors that I know of have either. More importantly, if I am, it's not because I'm white or of Irish descent.
That's what religion does...