This dichotomy is all in your head, and is only reflective of your own personal judgment.
No, it isn't.
Have you ever asked anyone why they were pierced? There are many reasons, most of which are very personal (extra sexual stimulation, to name just one).
The "extra sexual stimulation" is largely bullshit, with only a few women able to claim an increase in stimulation. It's been my experience that the only reason most kids are getting holes put in their body is because they think its cool. It's a style. Its the in thing to do for them. I've met 1:20 kids who actually have a sense of self expression arising from where, what, and how they do their piercings, tattoos, and cuttings.
Now, assuming you wear a suit and tie, why do you do this? Is it for comfort, self expression, or is it because it's the ultimate 'in thing to do'? (you dress in a suit, and you're in!)
I don't wear a suit. Not unless I'm meeting with a brand new client, if someones dying, or if someones getting married (the latter two of which are somber occasions of mourning). I do that as a show of respect for the other person. The rest of the time I wear running shoes, athletic shorts, a t-shirt, and some form of bandage, stint, or brace to compensate for whatever I've done to myself on my last run.
Now, if you care to not be a kneejerk reactionary, do yourself the favor of getting educated by using the Internet to research Modern Primativism. "Body Modification" is a marketing term used by cheap tattoo parlors who are selling an image.
Tattoos and piercings are, by definition, "body modification". They modify the body, do they not?
Poking holes in your body or getting the same generic tattoo that 500 other people have gotten is as much "body modification" as shooting out the tires and windows on your car is a vehicle modification. It's a crime what some people do to their bodies because they think it makes them unique, when the truth is it makes them exactly like every other punk with a hole in their lip.
Kindly define "modern primitive" for me then, and then tell me that that's somehow a better label.
I don't have to define it. You're on the Internet, do a search. Try actually learning about something for a change, instead of begging someone to spoonfeed you information. If half the kids who go getting pieces of metal shoved into their head actually did some research into the Modern Primitive movement, they would either not do it, or they'd do it right.
First of all, lets drop the PC bullshit. It's not "body modification". Either you're a modern primative - and proud of it - or you're just a pierced freak who wants to add holes to your head (and elsewhere) because it's the in thing to do.
And accepting that, you ought to realize that its growing less acceptable as IT becomes more and more a part of the corporate environment. Whereas eccentricities such as long hair, unkempt beards, and poor dress (if not outright violations of corporate dresscodes) were tolerated in order to get the talent, the geek chique no longer carries the credibility it used to. Corporate executives are looking for a more professional breed of IT managers and specialists who are more buttoned down and presentable.
Is it a hindrance? Well that depends on where your interests lie. If you're a corporate survivor looking to climb the ladder (or at least cling desperately to your rung), you're going to have to accept that that piercing in your septum which is getting green around the hole is going to factor in when you're up for review. However, if you're in IT as a lifestyle, because you love the soft flicker of hard drive access LED's, and are soothed by the gentle hum of RAID arrays accented by the mellow chatter of heads seeking to the right track, then you'll also pass off the pay and respect for a nice stuffy backroom where you'll languish at the bottom of IT payscales for eternity. Or, go and work for a more open company that is more concerned with the capabilities of its people than with how well they'd fare in a police line-up of tattood purse-snatching thugs.
In which case you would use file and print services for unix on your Windows platform. But anyone saavy enough to set up linux workstations running Samba is saavy enough to setup a linux file/print server running samba, nfs, lpd, cups, et al.
If you're going to argue Microsoft engaging in SLAPP, then do so. But to characterize them using their market position to their own advantage is a) revealing your own ignorance and b) pure propaganda.
And please...get a dictionary...look up monopoly. This is rediculous.
I love how eggheads and academics get thier panties in a wad when societies advancing use of technology gets in their way.
The answer here is self evident. If you want to study deep space, you need a presense in...deep space. At least consider the ramifications of having an observatory unhindered by terrestrial atmosphere, radiation, noise pollution, and so on.
Microsoft's latest attempt to reconcile with the European Commission's antitrust rulings against the company may result in another victim.
Nope.
It seems their offer, if accepted, will strike a considerable blow at a leading competitor in the realm of file and printer sharing.
You're repeating yourself, and it's still no.
The popular open source suite Samba stands to be the recipient of a backhanded slap from Redmond if the offer stands and the European branch of the Free Software Foundation is taking it personally.
Repeating yourself again, using imagery to reinforce it, and again...no.
How is Samba being specifically targeted? Greve argues this is because "Samba is the only remaining major competitor of Microsoft in this market."
Samba is not a competitor to Microsoft. Samba does not run on Microsoft Windows. Microsoft does not sell or market it's SMB protocols separately from Windows. Microsofts SMB protocols have not been ported to any other operating system on which Samba runs.
Microsoft refusing to open source their protocols and methods does not disadvantage the Samba project, principally because nothing has changed anyway. Samba arose from reverse engineering SMB messages sniffed out on a network. And Samba engineers will continue to improvise, adapt, and overcome like they always have. That adaptability is what makes OSS better than proprietary solutions.
Clearly we're going to have to wittle this down for challenged individuals such as yourself.
First of all, nobody (least of all myself) asserted that mAh is a 'measurement of standby power'. It represents current sinked over time. Since the US standard electrical voltage is 120 volts, you can infer then that the power disappated by a device drawing.150 mAh of power is.018 Watts/hour.
Now, go around and count every device pluggin into something in your house. If it lights up, beeps, or cannot otherwise operate immediately after being plugged in, it's using power. Now multiply that number by 5 watts per hour, times 8,760 hours, and tell me that this is not a problem.
This is (for once) not the same. For starters, fusors require intense vacuum to sustain the reaction. They also require high thermal temperatures to initiate the reaction. Once the fusion reaction starts in a fusor, it is onlysustainable for a few moments because there is no reliable way to inject new hydrogen atoms into the core. Finally, a fusor uses Inertial Electrostatic Confinement to keep the reaction together. This device is less of a fusion reactor and more of a particle accelerator which does uses energies too low to crack particles, but high enough to fuse them together. Different animals, same results.
Devices on standby power consume 30% of all power.
150 ma of idle current is a tad high, by the way. It's closer to.150 mAh. Now mutiply that by every adapter you have plugged in at home and at work, then by 320 million people using electricity in the US, and you come up with a few terawatt hours of electric power that we can reclaim.
If you can pull your head from your rectum long enough, you might find that there is this concept known as "common ground", and while you'd rather be bashing Bush, you should be working with him.
So, it's news that Japan is pushing for more efficient poweruse, but Slashdot have never mentioned how the Bush Energy Plan promotes the use of high efficiency appliances, such as no-power standby devices which don't consume power to maintain a ready state. In spite of the obstruction from members of Congress, Bush has already allocated some $77 million for research and development of high efficiency appliances like waterheaters that use a heat pump to efficiently warm water instead of a wasteful heating element (the element also corrodes and taints water).
I have a live, and can't be here to pimp the President's energy policy 24/7. It's disconcerting to see that Slashdot goes all the way to Japan for a story taking place in their own back yard.
1) You say "I'd argue that they are doing just the opposite...", but you don't. The EU is not, in fact, happenning. Both France and the Netherlands have said no just this week. There is strong sentiment against not merely an EU Constitution, but the EU superstate itself. Polls show Germans trending towards a no-vote, and UK strongly opposed. The value of the Euro has been propped up on the notion of a EU superstate, and this weeks double-whammy has hit its value hard. I'm not out to blow smoke up anyone's ass, economics is economics. The high Euro has driven businesses out of the EU states, shrank the global market for European goods, and shaken confidence in European monetary policy. Now the Euro has lost 9% of it's value in just the last week. The writing is on the wall. If you don't believe me, try to get a job in Germany.
2) Again, you fail to make your argument. The fact that you dismiss the subject matter as nationalism really just shows how ignorant you are. I wouldn't be suprised to know that you are one of the pompous arrogant euro-gas bags.
3) Subsidies. The American economy is probably the least subsidized economy on the planet. Notwithstanding the European worldview that 'failing to overtax a company is a subsidy', there is always a small amount of subsidization of any industry, and to the extent that it promotes job growth that's okay. But there is a wholesale difference between US subsidies to encourage private sector growth, and the straight out direct funding and State control that occurs in Europe. Airbus is the greatest example of a private company supported by government subsidies. The airline industry in France is yet another example, where the government pays privately-employed workers, not the airlines.
And what does fox news have to do anything? Are you so wrapped up in insecurity that you see your favorite boogeyman in every dissenting opinion? Kindly extract your head from your ass, please. You and the moron who marked this post as "informative". Slashdot is so pathetic sometimes.
Europe is losing ground rapidly to the US economically. If it's not the rapid loss of market share by European firms in international markets, it's the flight of large Euro corporations to the US (also helped along by the strong euro). Their answer as of late has been to allege "subsidies", like the $5 billion Boeing supposedly receives from the goverment for their aircraft. The problem is that the EC considers lower tax rates here in the US to be a "tax subsidy". Yes, if you don't charge corporations into the ground the way they do in Europe, then you're actually subsidizing them. So sayeth officials like Peter Mandelson, who on Tuesday did the most unsportsman like thing and filed a complaint with the WTO claiming $5 bn in subsidies for Boeing. This was done in retaliation for a complaint filed on Monday by the Bush administration about the subsidies given to Airbus. Of course, Mandelson could hardly argue that point, since the EU planned € 1.5bn to promote the new A380, and Airbus is also demanding € 450 mn from the British government to build wing assemblies for the A350.
Here's the clue for you pompous gassbags who are slowsly strangling europes economy: liberalize your economy. Stop taxing the shit out of your domestic corporations, and you won't have to subsidize them on the back end.
That's real genius from our friends in Europe. They're going to protest getting laid off by going on strike. At least IBM knows who to let go now. The irony is that Unions are getting in on the act. Strike that, that's not ironic: All unions care about is preserving their Union dues, and 13,000 laid off workers can't pay dues.
Here's the deal: it costs too much money to do business in Europe. That's why European firms like Axxa, Ikea, and Ericsson are moving across the pond. Liberalize your economy, and you'll find more jobs.
I wasn't talking about "the third world" in general, I was talking about Cuba. Cuban policies towards Angola have been arrogant, inept, and grossly harmful. The same can be said for a few other, specific cases in which Cuba interfered politically or militarily in a sovereign nation. Cuba isn't responsible for the ills of the entire third world, but Cuba clearly does carry out plots to undermine foreign societies in specific cases.
Explain to me how Cuba is a victim, and not merely a loser?
Furthermore, think of all the nations where the US has interfered militarily or economically; some of them have done better than Cuba, but a lot of them have not...I also hope that political change in Cuba won't come at the hands of US assassins; the US should get out of the regime change business.
As long as I live, I will never understand this morbid fascination people have with blaming the troubles of the third world on some manic US plot to undermine foreign societies.
Newsflash, dumbass! Books written after an event may refer to historical events!
For the reading comprehension challenged (you), the cite your provided claims the origin of the phrase "useful idiots" is circa the early 80's.
A Google search for 'Auf der Kommunischt' returns 0 hits.
And your point is what? That if it's not in google, it doesn't exist? Don't be a moron all your life.
Why I am I not surprised that you declined to argue your case why central control in the private sector does not result in ownership?
I haven't declined to argue anything. I merely sought to address the points of your post. However, you predictably launched into a grammer-nazi nit-parade. If you want to have an adult discussion - which I don't believe you are capable of - then lets proceed. Otherwise, stop wasting time, bandwidth, and SQL rows.
Yes, he did. The book cited in that link was written in 1989. The first reference to Lenin's use of the phrase "useful idiots" in Western culture appeared in Nazi propaganda in 1938. The propaganda film 'Auf der Kommunischt' showed footage of Lenin, and quoted him as referring to the peasants as 'useful fools [idiots]' who did not understand communism. The Nazi's were ardent anti-bolsheviks.
So the board of directors actually own companies, not the shareholders?
Why am I not suprised (or impressed) by your complete lack of understanding of capitalism, or democracy.
Slashdot Mirror
No, it isn't.
The "extra sexual stimulation" is largely bullshit, with only a few women able to claim an increase in stimulation. It's been my experience that the only reason most kids are getting holes put in their body is because they think its cool. It's a style. Its the in thing to do for them. I've met 1:20 kids who actually have a sense of self expression arising from where, what, and how they do their piercings, tattoos, and cuttings.
I don't wear a suit. Not unless I'm meeting with a brand new client, if someones dying, or if someones getting married (the latter two of which are somber occasions of mourning). I do that as a show of respect for the other person. The rest of the time I wear running shoes, athletic shorts, a t-shirt, and some form of bandage, stint, or brace to compensate for whatever I've done to myself on my last run.
Now, if you care to not be a kneejerk reactionary, do yourself the favor of getting educated by using the Internet to research Modern Primativism. "Body Modification" is a marketing term used by cheap tattoo parlors who are selling an image.
Poking holes in your body or getting the same generic tattoo that 500 other people have gotten is as much "body modification" as shooting out the tires and windows on your car is a vehicle modification. It's a crime what some people do to their bodies because they think it makes them unique, when the truth is it makes them exactly like every other punk with a hole in their lip.
I don't have to define it. You're on the Internet, do a search. Try actually learning about something for a change, instead of begging someone to spoonfeed you information. If half the kids who go getting pieces of metal shoved into their head actually did some research into the Modern Primitive movement, they would either not do it, or they'd do it right.
First of all, lets drop the PC bullshit. It's not "body modification". Either you're a modern primative - and proud of it - or you're just a pierced freak who wants to add holes to your head (and elsewhere) because it's the in thing to do.
And accepting that, you ought to realize that its growing less acceptable as IT becomes more and more a part of the corporate environment. Whereas eccentricities such as long hair, unkempt beards, and poor dress (if not outright violations of corporate dresscodes) were tolerated in order to get the talent, the geek chique no longer carries the credibility it used to. Corporate executives are looking for a more professional breed of IT managers and specialists who are more buttoned down and presentable.
Is it a hindrance? Well that depends on where your interests lie. If you're a corporate survivor looking to climb the ladder (or at least cling desperately to your rung), you're going to have to accept that that piercing in your septum which is getting green around the hole is going to factor in when you're up for review. However, if you're in IT as a lifestyle, because you love the soft flicker of hard drive access LED's, and are soothed by the gentle hum of RAID arrays accented by the mellow chatter of heads seeking to the right track, then you'll also pass off the pay and respect for a nice stuffy backroom where you'll languish at the bottom of IT payscales for eternity. Or, go and work for a more open company that is more concerned with the capabilities of its people than with how well they'd fare in a police line-up of tattood purse-snatching thugs.
In which case you would use file and print services for unix on your Windows platform. But anyone saavy enough to set up linux workstations running Samba is saavy enough to setup a linux file/print server running samba, nfs, lpd, cups, et al.
Microsoft can do that now.
This...again...changes nothing.
If you're going to argue Microsoft engaging in SLAPP, then do so. But to characterize them using their market position to their own advantage is a) revealing your own ignorance and b) pure propaganda.
And please...get a dictionary...look up monopoly. This is rediculous.
Samba will still exist. People will still move to *nix/BSD running Samba because the initial cost is cheaper (and by many estimates, TCO).
This changes nothing.
I love how eggheads and academics get thier panties in a wad when societies advancing use of technology gets in their way.
The answer here is self evident. If you want to study deep space, you need a presense in...deep space. At least consider the ramifications of having an observatory unhindered by terrestrial atmosphere, radiation, noise pollution, and so on.
Nope.
You're repeating yourself, and it's still no.
Repeating yourself again, using imagery to reinforce it, and again...no.
Samba is not a competitor to Microsoft. Samba does not run on Microsoft Windows. Microsoft does not sell or market it's SMB protocols separately from Windows. Microsofts SMB protocols have not been ported to any other operating system on which Samba runs.
Microsoft refusing to open source their protocols and methods does not disadvantage the Samba project, principally because nothing has changed anyway. Samba arose from reverse engineering SMB messages sniffed out on a network. And Samba engineers will continue to improvise, adapt, and overcome like they always have. That adaptability is what makes OSS better than proprietary solutions.
Now go back to sleep, chicken little.
Clearly we're going to have to wittle this down for challenged individuals such as yourself.
.150 mAh of power is .018 Watts/hour.
First of all, nobody (least of all myself) asserted that mAh is a 'measurement of standby power'. It represents current sinked over time. Since the US standard electrical voltage is 120 volts, you can infer then that the power disappated by a device drawing
Now, go around and count every device pluggin into something in your house. If it lights up, beeps, or cannot otherwise operate immediately after being plugged in, it's using power. Now multiply that number by 5 watts per hour, times 8,760 hours, and tell me that this is not a problem.
This is (for once) not the same. For starters, fusors require intense vacuum to sustain the reaction. They also require high thermal temperatures to initiate the reaction. Once the fusion reaction starts in a fusor, it is onlysustainable for a few moments because there is no reliable way to inject new hydrogen atoms into the core. Finally, a fusor uses Inertial Electrostatic Confinement to keep the reaction together. This device is less of a fusion reactor and more of a particle accelerator which does uses energies too low to crack particles, but high enough to fuse them together. Different animals, same results.
Devices on standby power consume 30% of all power.
.150 mAh. Now mutiply that by every adapter you have plugged in at home and at work, then by 320 million people using electricity in the US, and you come up with a few terawatt hours of electric power that we can reclaim.
150 ma of idle current is a tad high, by the way. It's closer to
If you can pull your head from your rectum long enough, you might find that there is this concept known as "common ground", and while you'd rather be bashing Bush, you should be working with him.
You'd compare the defense sector to building a hot water heater?
Don't quit your dayjob. You're just... not funny.
So, it's news that Japan is pushing for more efficient poweruse, but Slashdot have never mentioned how the Bush Energy Plan promotes the use of high efficiency appliances, such as no-power standby devices which don't consume power to maintain a ready state. In spite of the obstruction from members of Congress, Bush has already allocated some $77 million for research and development of high efficiency appliances like waterheaters that use a heat pump to efficiently warm water instead of a wasteful heating element (the element also corrodes and taints water).
I have a live, and can't be here to pimp the President's energy policy 24/7. It's disconcerting to see that Slashdot goes all the way to Japan for a story taking place in their own back yard.
1) You say "I'd argue that they are doing just the opposite...", but you don't. The EU is not, in fact, happenning. Both France and the Netherlands have said no just this week. There is strong sentiment against not merely an EU Constitution, but the EU superstate itself. Polls show Germans trending towards a no-vote, and UK strongly opposed. The value of the Euro has been propped up on the notion of a EU superstate, and this weeks double-whammy has hit its value hard. I'm not out to blow smoke up anyone's ass, economics is economics. The high Euro has driven businesses out of the EU states, shrank the global market for European goods, and shaken confidence in European monetary policy. Now the Euro has lost 9% of it's value in just the last week. The writing is on the wall. If you don't believe me, try to get a job in Germany.
2) Again, you fail to make your argument. The fact that you dismiss the subject matter as nationalism really just shows how ignorant you are. I wouldn't be suprised to know that you are one of the pompous arrogant euro-gas bags.
3) Subsidies. The American economy is probably the least subsidized economy on the planet. Notwithstanding the European worldview that 'failing to overtax a company is a subsidy', there is always a small amount of subsidization of any industry, and to the extent that it promotes job growth that's okay. But there is a wholesale difference between US subsidies to encourage private sector growth, and the straight out direct funding and State control that occurs in Europe. Airbus is the greatest example of a private company supported by government subsidies. The airline industry in France is yet another example, where the government pays privately-employed workers, not the airlines.
And what does fox news have to do anything? Are you so wrapped up in insecurity that you see your favorite boogeyman in every dissenting opinion? Kindly extract your head from your ass, please. You and the moron who marked this post as "informative". Slashdot is so pathetic sometimes.
Europe is losing ground rapidly to the US economically. If it's not the rapid loss of market share by European firms in international markets, it's the flight of large Euro corporations to the US (also helped along by the strong euro). Their answer as of late has been to allege "subsidies", like the $5 billion Boeing supposedly receives from the goverment for their aircraft. The problem is that the EC considers lower tax rates here in the US to be a "tax subsidy". Yes, if you don't charge corporations into the ground the way they do in Europe, then you're actually subsidizing them. So sayeth officials like Peter Mandelson, who on Tuesday did the most unsportsman like thing and filed a complaint with the WTO claiming $5 bn in subsidies for Boeing. This was done in retaliation for a complaint filed on Monday by the Bush administration about the subsidies given to Airbus. Of course, Mandelson could hardly argue that point, since the EU planned € 1.5bn to promote the new A380, and Airbus is also demanding € 450 mn from the British government to build wing assemblies for the A350.
Here's the clue for you pompous gassbags who are slowsly strangling europes economy: liberalize your economy. Stop taxing the shit out of your domestic corporations, and you won't have to subsidize them on the back end.
And that's all the reply you deserve, troll-boy.
That's real genius from our friends in Europe. They're going to protest getting laid off by going on strike. At least IBM knows who to let go now. The irony is that Unions are getting in on the act. Strike that, that's not ironic: All unions care about is preserving their Union dues, and 13,000 laid off workers can't pay dues.
Here's the deal: it costs too much money to do business in Europe. That's why European firms like Axxa, Ikea, and Ericsson are moving across the pond. Liberalize your economy, and you'll find more jobs.
Explain to me how Cuba is a victim, and not merely a loser?
That aliens really did kidnap humans for genetic experiements. God damn those Eidolons.
As long as I live, I will never understand this morbid fascination people have with blaming the troubles of the third world on some manic US plot to undermine foreign societies.
For the reading comprehension challenged (you), the cite your provided claims the origin of the phrase "useful idiots" is circa the early 80's.
And your point is what? That if it's not in google, it doesn't exist? Don't be a moron all your life.
I haven't declined to argue anything. I merely sought to address the points of your post. However, you predictably launched into a grammer-nazi nit-parade. If you want to have an adult discussion - which I don't believe you are capable of - then lets proceed. Otherwise, stop wasting time, bandwidth, and SQL rows.
Troll or moron. Which are you?
It's not very logical, no. Nor is it what was stated.
Do you always talk about logic after making such illogical leaps?
Yes, he did. The book cited in that link was written in 1989. The first reference to Lenin's use of the phrase "useful idiots" in Western culture appeared in Nazi propaganda in 1938. The propaganda film 'Auf der Kommunischt' showed footage of Lenin, and quoted him as referring to the peasants as 'useful fools [idiots]' who did not understand communism. The Nazi's were ardent anti-bolsheviks.
Why am I not suprised (or impressed) by your complete lack of understanding of capitalism, or democracy.