when you say something fanatical like "no republicans have ever tried to push a bill like that on the entire country" you put yourself in a group that hates helping sick people and also tends to think it's great to blow up people elsewhere (like, suffering is just great all around, I guess). You then try to use the Constitution to justify your statements - but don't really understand what is in the document at all. Such as, the Constitution directly stating there shouldn't be a standing army. The two subjects are remarkably intertwined; ACA costs a small fraction of the wars in the middle east, and at least ACA provides a/benefit/. But hey, maybe you buck the system. Maybe you don't like our middle east involvement either - maybe you're an honest "constitutionalist." Which would be great, except for the farking part that the FFs were slave owners and treated women like crap. Stop pretending one side or the other are angels without flaws, and stop pretending the Constitution was sent by G-d. Argue something on it's own merits, not based on what some long-dead slave owner thought.
to be fair, this was only really clear starting with Omnibus - prior to that, HIPAA relied a lot on common sense and a personal sense of ethics from the reader. Fortunately, the semi-retroactive nature of it to 2009, plus Omnibus being released 9 months prior to healthcare.gov, means that yes - the government faces stiff penalties of paying itself money (amount=irrelevant, since paying self) and the BAs made $1.7BILLION for making a farking WEBSITE for fark's sake, so I don't think the 1.5M max fine will really cramp their style much.
they can't, but the fine has a max penalty per year, and that max would just be the fed paying itself a number at which it wouldn't blink even if it wasn't paying itself. Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it won't happen - if the only penalty for underage drinking was you had to have sex with Scarlet Johansen, do you think that would work as much of a deterrent? We don't live in a world where society can decide it doesn't accept a certain behavior, and then just expect everyone to not do it regardless what the penalty might be
I can not imagine a scenario in which something *has* to be local (ie, not a term into a cluster or HPC unit of some sort), *has* to be a laptop, and *has* to have 3-6 disk slots. Are you pretending you need the multiple slots for raid for performance reasons? Are you really going to claim that an SSD isn't fast enough for you? Perhaps you have to myopic of a view, or perhaps - and this is far more likely imo, you're part of the "engineers are Gods!" crowd, and the real answer is that the engineers want an uber-laptop they can take home for personal use, on their employer's dime. Seriously, *try* to justify why it has to have those specs. I dare ya.
really? If china blocked all incoming email from google servers, you don't think that might force people outside of china who want to do business with people in china to use email services other than google? Are you/certain/ you know how the internet works?
umm...so I guess you don't buy anything? Note I didn't give a specific something listed....you don't buy/anything/? Fermenters, cell phones, edamame, board games, yarn, whatever?
that's quite the sense of entitlement you've got there - yes, sometimes things aren't working. So what, go outside, or maybe spend time with your familiy. Secondly, you might look into getting broadband - people are able to get decent speeds now, we no longer have to use dialup (ie, downloading something shouldn't be a concern anymore). 10 years from now I won't have a PS4 or XBox One, just like I don't play on my old atari anymore either (though I do play clones on my PC sometimes...which satisfies the nostalgia without needing rooms full of shelves to store various types of media and players). I *am* voting with my money - I'm getting something more convenient, reliable, flexible, etc. Yes, in fact, I said reliable - have you never had your house burn down, or robbed? I've had both happen, both things wiped out the entire library of everything. Now though, I log on with the various services and boom - my library is still right there. Amaaaaaazing stuff. While Sony and Microsoft should have been able to prevent the issues, they're still the victims in the situation - how about we put at least/some/ of the blame on the people who did it?
it must really bother you that the ozone layer is recovering after a global effort to fix it, huh. I mean really, it impinges on the ultra-wealthy to do whatever they want, and that's a bad thing to the likes of you...society saying enough is enough on issues that effect everyone? Horrible, it should be the 0.1% making those decisions! (misdirection is such a fun tool, eh?)
um, there can be varying degrees of something. Just because two people are attractive, for instance, doesn't mean they're equally attractive. Outright refusing to engage in honest debate however, does make someone something other than a skeptic; with so much actual data painting a relatively clear picture, if you're going to say that picture is something else then... The foundations of statistics are based on the idea that if a pattern emerges with very little deviation - very few outliers in the data - then you can be very certain (to some degree) of the conclusion. If you're going to deny the very process itself, versus the results, then we have to throw away most of what we know - not just climate change.
were I to show data that average temps on Mars increased during generally about the same time range, I could point to the cause being external (ie, something with the Sun). Thus it wouldn't be anything humans were doing. That (were there facts to back it up) would be an example of actual skepticism. Covering your eyes and yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA" is not.
the English speaker isn't misunderstanding, they're being intentionally misled. That is a very big difference. They are perfectly understanding the intended message.
Um, I don't if you're aware, but Islam didn't invent English. The word you're describing is "submission" or perhaps "conformity." "Peace" means, in English, what it means - Islam doesn't get to define that.
+1 to your comment. Some of the biggest problems in our current society trace back to making groups of people no longer groups of people - we pretend that corporations have a compass, when a piece of paper can have no such thing. We then treat the government as some external entity that oppresses us, when in theory the Great Experiment is supposed to be "government of the people, for the people, by the people" - *we* are the government. These people *are* uber. Are those people served by having morals, in so much as making money is concerned? Clearly they don't think so.
His text was off then, but not his subject line - "Capitalism does not reward morality." That it's possible to be moral and somewhat succeed isn't per se the point - the point/question is whether morality is a hindrance. It most certainly is one of those, when in a society (like ours) where companies can make false claims to having morality - some of us intentionally seek out moral businesses to patronize. When truthful labeling (and the like) is not mandatory, and court cases actually strike the requirement to be truthful, then there really can be no more reward for morality.
Uh, there is no way that a PC could replace my DSP...first, my DSP is a full fledged AVR putting out serious power to large speakers throughout my livingroom. Second, it can be controlled by my phone or my remote, with 3 zones and the ability to rapidly play various internet radio (and control thereof) channels, such as pandora or what-have-you. If I want to start my americana station in zone 3, watch a movie in zone 2, play a comedy station in zone 1 - all done in seconds from my phone or easy remote. Versus logging into a laptop connected to an aux port, then starting the pandora app, then saying "well, guess that's all I'm doing right now..."
Real home theatre/entertainment systems can't use a cheap PC. What in the heck would be driving my PSB Stratus Gold loudspeakers? The digital output from a PC? You're nuts. Oh wait, you want me to then get little amplifiers for each different thing, and maybe multiple video cards and sound cards so I can mimic mutli-zone. Or...and it's just an alternative - I could use a real AVR with a PS4 plugged in as a source (a source which just happens to handle the 3d bluray disks I occasionally use, though I do streaming >90% of the time).
You're a fanatic. Just accept that the rest of us aren't. I could also walk to work, since it provides the greatest flexibility of what direction I go - but instead I ride a harley, where I've got limitations such as staying in lanes (sortof) and going the same direction as everyone else. I know, I know, sheeple.
when I bought my ps4, it was a very cheap high-quality 3d blu ray player. It also happened to play games, which I enjoy. Instead of spending $2k on a PC to plug in to my $8k home theatre setup, I plug in a PS4 and it works great. I/suppose/ I could plug a PC into one of the AUX ports in front, and then awkwardly try to find a place to put my keyboard and muss around with a mouse...or - and this is just an alternative - I could use a little handheld controller thingy that pairs up with my PS4. Decisions, decisions. My overall experience with a 65" TV and hifi 7.1 sound while sitting comfortably on my couch is WAY higher, in my experience, than it would be sitting in my office upstairs - even if the graphics had slightly more detail on the PC.
That way I can then have a laptop that I can use for work, and get a mid-range "gaming" laptop so it is relatively decent for a while, but not actually use it for games much...instead, I use it for home, school, work, etc. And it only needs cost me $1200 or so. I could spend $3k on a gaming laptop, but then I'd have a 17" screen with stereo sound, instead of a 65" screen with 7.1 surround. Maybe some of us don't want multiple PCs? Maybe some of us want a better overall experience, instead of just having slightly better graphics detail? Maybe those of us like that are a big enough market that consoles do actually sell, despite gaming PCs being an option?
and why was there a monument to Steve Jobs anyway? Seems like "today is monday" would be a good enough reason to tear it down. That said, this was a spectacularly bad reason, I'm just saying no reason was necessary. Doing something for the wrong reason doesn't make it the wrong thing to do - if I make a habit of drinking several glasses of water a day because I think the midichlorians need it for fuel, that doesn't mean I was wrong for drinking water...
First, your phone is amazingly insecure - unless you have one of the ones dedicated to security. The most valuable thing you have is you - the who of who you are. Trusting that identity to your phone is...spectacularly foolish. Second, most people don't have a phone that could survive a trip to the hotel pool or hot tub, whereas the throwaway cards can do just that, just fine.
If someone breaks the card's security, the worst you're out is the stuff in your room. The more you stuff into your phone, then the worst that could happen is you aren't you anymore.
" Exactly what do you think in the 1980-90s you were doing to the mini computer culture of the generation before you when you made client server cheap and ubiquitous?"
Wasn't nobody doin nothin with Linux in the 80s, and the PC world (Doom, etc) was already out and in full swing before the earliest (Slackware, for instance) distros were even started.
Your history is a bit off here. Linux's earliest intent was as a workstation OS.
1) where in what I wrote did I say linux started as a server OS? Neverminding my first use of it as being just that, but "year of the linux desktop" doesn't - and never - meant that it would be the year someone would finally use it as a a desktop. I used it as one for many years.
2) Linux's first usage (and especially intent) most certainly was not as a workstation. "Workstation" has that word "Work" at the front of it because you accomplished "work" on the workstation, versus the work being the workstation. When I started using it in 94, no sane person would use it as a "workstation" because they'd be futzing with their machine too much. The mother's day release of redhat, which I still have on an old infomagic cd pack sitting on the shelf above my desk (for giggles), was not a "replacement" for a pizzabox in any far remote sense of the word.
Linux's earliest intent was to be a hobby plaything. It was for people who wanted to tinker around and play their hand at writing a device driver, or otherwise really know what it was their PC was doing. As for Linux being disruptive to UNIX - no, it wasn't. It was just cheap/free UNIX clone ala MINIX and other "learn-what-is-really-happening" educational tools of the time, but it still held the same "do one thing, do it well" principle, it came from/was birthed from the community/culture of UNIX users of the time, thus had more or less that same community and their ideals. Linux also never coopted anything - it eventually matured enough to be a competitor to the giants that came before it. Poettering's stunt was pure agism, as was that which allowed it to succeed. Change for the sake of change is and has always been stupid - don't try to paint it as a cycle, that Linux started the same way. Linux was an educational tool, and 100% of the rebellion of it was communistic; Ubuntu quite literally was anti-community from the start, as a core principle - as is and was systemd.
Slashdot Mirror
when you say something fanatical like "no republicans have ever tried to push a bill like that on the entire country" you put yourself in a group that hates helping sick people and also tends to think it's great to blow up people elsewhere (like, suffering is just great all around, I guess). You then try to use the Constitution to justify your statements - but don't really understand what is in the document at all. Such as, the Constitution directly stating there shouldn't be a standing army. The two subjects are remarkably intertwined; ACA costs a small fraction of the wars in the middle east, and at least ACA provides a /benefit/. But hey, maybe you buck the system. Maybe you don't like our middle east involvement either - maybe you're an honest "constitutionalist." Which would be great, except for the farking part that the FFs were slave owners and treated women like crap. Stop pretending one side or the other are angels without flaws, and stop pretending the Constitution was sent by G-d. Argue something on it's own merits, not based on what some long-dead slave owner thought.
to be fair, this was only really clear starting with Omnibus - prior to that, HIPAA relied a lot on common sense and a personal sense of ethics from the reader. Fortunately, the semi-retroactive nature of it to 2009, plus Omnibus being released 9 months prior to healthcare.gov, means that yes - the government faces stiff penalties of paying itself money (amount=irrelevant, since paying self) and the BAs made $1.7BILLION for making a farking WEBSITE for fark's sake, so I don't think the 1.5M max fine will really cramp their style much.
::blink:: wait, what? Something inside me wants to know how you interpret Art1, Sect8, Clause12...just for giggles.
they can't, but the fine has a max penalty per year, and that max would just be the fed paying itself a number at which it wouldn't blink even if it wasn't paying itself. Just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it won't happen - if the only penalty for underage drinking was you had to have sex with Scarlet Johansen, do you think that would work as much of a deterrent? We don't live in a world where society can decide it doesn't accept a certain behavior, and then just expect everyone to not do it regardless what the penalty might be
I can not imagine a scenario in which something *has* to be local (ie, not a term into a cluster or HPC unit of some sort), *has* to be a laptop, and *has* to have 3-6 disk slots. Are you pretending you need the multiple slots for raid for performance reasons? Are you really going to claim that an SSD isn't fast enough for you? Perhaps you have to myopic of a view, or perhaps - and this is far more likely imo, you're part of the "engineers are Gods!" crowd, and the real answer is that the engineers want an uber-laptop they can take home for personal use, on their employer's dime. Seriously, *try* to justify why it has to have those specs. I dare ya.
really? If china blocked all incoming email from google servers, you don't think that might force people outside of china who want to do business with people in china to use email services other than google? Are you /certain/ you know how the internet works?
umm...so I guess you don't buy anything? Note I didn't give a specific something listed....you don't buy /anything/? Fermenters, cell phones, edamame, board games, yarn, whatever?
that's quite the sense of entitlement you've got there - yes, sometimes things aren't working. So what, go outside, or maybe spend time with your familiy. Secondly, you might look into getting broadband - people are able to get decent speeds now, we no longer have to use dialup (ie, downloading something shouldn't be a concern anymore). 10 years from now I won't have a PS4 or XBox One, just like I don't play on my old atari anymore either (though I do play clones on my PC sometimes...which satisfies the nostalgia without needing rooms full of shelves to store various types of media and players). I *am* voting with my money - I'm getting something more convenient, reliable, flexible, etc. Yes, in fact, I said reliable - have you never had your house burn down, or robbed? I've had both happen, both things wiped out the entire library of everything. Now though, I log on with the various services and boom - my library is still right there. Amaaaaaazing stuff. While Sony and Microsoft should have been able to prevent the issues, they're still the victims in the situation - how about we put at least /some/ of the blame on the people who did it?
it's still how it works. Apparently the GP doesn't even think about it but yeah, they pay to receive phone calls.
it must really bother you that the ozone layer is recovering after a global effort to fix it, huh. I mean really, it impinges on the ultra-wealthy to do whatever they want, and that's a bad thing to the likes of you...society saying enough is enough on issues that effect everyone? Horrible, it should be the 0.1% making those decisions! (misdirection is such a fun tool, eh?)
um, there can be varying degrees of something. Just because two people are attractive, for instance, doesn't mean they're equally attractive. Outright refusing to engage in honest debate however, does make someone something other than a skeptic; with so much actual data painting a relatively clear picture, if you're going to say that picture is something else then... The foundations of statistics are based on the idea that if a pattern emerges with very little deviation - very few outliers in the data - then you can be very certain (to some degree) of the conclusion. If you're going to deny the very process itself, versus the results, then we have to throw away most of what we know - not just climate change.
were I to show data that average temps on Mars increased during generally about the same time range, I could point to the cause being external (ie, something with the Sun). Thus it wouldn't be anything humans were doing. That (were there facts to back it up) would be an example of actual skepticism. Covering your eyes and yelling "I CAN'T HEAR YOU LALALALALA" is not.
the English speaker isn't misunderstanding, they're being intentionally misled. That is a very big difference. They are perfectly understanding the intended message.
Um, I don't if you're aware, but Islam didn't invent English. The word you're describing is "submission" or perhaps "conformity." "Peace" means, in English, what it means - Islam doesn't get to define that.
+1 to your comment. Some of the biggest problems in our current society trace back to making groups of people no longer groups of people - we pretend that corporations have a compass, when a piece of paper can have no such thing. We then treat the government as some external entity that oppresses us, when in theory the Great Experiment is supposed to be "government of the people, for the people, by the people" - *we* are the government. These people *are* uber. Are those people served by having morals, in so much as making money is concerned? Clearly they don't think so.
His text was off then, but not his subject line - "Capitalism does not reward morality." That it's possible to be moral and somewhat succeed isn't per se the point - the point/question is whether morality is a hindrance. It most certainly is one of those, when in a society (like ours) where companies can make false claims to having morality - some of us intentionally seek out moral businesses to patronize. When truthful labeling (and the like) is not mandatory, and court cases actually strike the requirement to be truthful, then there really can be no more reward for morality.
Uh, there is no way that a PC could replace my DSP...first, my DSP is a full fledged AVR putting out serious power to large speakers throughout my livingroom. Second, it can be controlled by my phone or my remote, with 3 zones and the ability to rapidly play various internet radio (and control thereof) channels, such as pandora or what-have-you. If I want to start my americana station in zone 3, watch a movie in zone 2, play a comedy station in zone 1 - all done in seconds from my phone or easy remote. Versus logging into a laptop connected to an aux port, then starting the pandora app, then saying "well, guess that's all I'm doing right now..."
Real home theatre/entertainment systems can't use a cheap PC. What in the heck would be driving my PSB Stratus Gold loudspeakers? The digital output from a PC? You're nuts. Oh wait, you want me to then get little amplifiers for each different thing, and maybe multiple video cards and sound cards so I can mimic mutli-zone. Or...and it's just an alternative - I could use a real AVR with a PS4 plugged in as a source (a source which just happens to handle the 3d bluray disks I occasionally use, though I do streaming >90% of the time).
You're a fanatic. Just accept that the rest of us aren't. I could also walk to work, since it provides the greatest flexibility of what direction I go - but instead I ride a harley, where I've got limitations such as staying in lanes (sortof) and going the same direction as everyone else. I know, I know, sheeple.
when I bought my ps4, it was a very cheap high-quality 3d blu ray player. It also happened to play games, which I enjoy. Instead of spending $2k on a PC to plug in to my $8k home theatre setup, I plug in a PS4 and it works great. I /suppose/ I could plug a PC into one of the AUX ports in front, and then awkwardly try to find a place to put my keyboard and muss around with a mouse...or - and this is just an alternative - I could use a little handheld controller thingy that pairs up with my PS4. Decisions, decisions. My overall experience with a 65" TV and hifi 7.1 sound while sitting comfortably on my couch is WAY higher, in my experience, than it would be sitting in my office upstairs - even if the graphics had slightly more detail on the PC.
That way I can then have a laptop that I can use for work, and get a mid-range "gaming" laptop so it is relatively decent for a while, but not actually use it for games much...instead, I use it for home, school, work, etc. And it only needs cost me $1200 or so. I could spend $3k on a gaming laptop, but then I'd have a 17" screen with stereo sound, instead of a 65" screen with 7.1 surround. Maybe some of us don't want multiple PCs? Maybe some of us want a better overall experience, instead of just having slightly better graphics detail? Maybe those of us like that are a big enough market that consoles do actually sell, despite gaming PCs being an option?
you're a horrible person for wanting such unreasonable things. Clearly you just don't know how incredibly useful a "smarthome" is. And stuff.
and why was there a monument to Steve Jobs anyway? Seems like "today is monday" would be a good enough reason to tear it down. That said, this was a spectacularly bad reason, I'm just saying no reason was necessary. Doing something for the wrong reason doesn't make it the wrong thing to do - if I make a habit of drinking several glasses of water a day because I think the midichlorians need it for fuel, that doesn't mean I was wrong for drinking water...
the reason he brought up voting was because of your sig. There was a point being made.
First, your phone is amazingly insecure - unless you have one of the ones dedicated to security. The most valuable thing you have is you - the who of who you are. Trusting that identity to your phone is...spectacularly foolish. Second, most people don't have a phone that could survive a trip to the hotel pool or hot tub, whereas the throwaway cards can do just that, just fine.
If someone breaks the card's security, the worst you're out is the stuff in your room. The more you stuff into your phone, then the worst that could happen is you aren't you anymore.
The point is that the rules make this new feature pointless.
PS -
" Exactly what do you think in the 1980-90s you were doing to the mini computer culture of the generation before you when you made client server cheap and ubiquitous?"
Wasn't nobody doin nothin with Linux in the 80s, and the PC world (Doom, etc) was already out and in full swing before the earliest (Slackware, for instance) distros were even started.
Your history is a bit off here. Linux's earliest intent was as a workstation OS.
1) where in what I wrote did I say linux started as a server OS? Neverminding my first use of it as being just that, but "year of the linux desktop" doesn't - and never - meant that it would be the year someone would finally use it as a a desktop. I used it as one for many years.
2) Linux's first usage (and especially intent) most certainly was not as a workstation. "Workstation" has that word "Work" at the front of it because you accomplished "work" on the workstation, versus the work being the workstation. When I started using it in 94, no sane person would use it as a "workstation" because they'd be futzing with their machine too much. The mother's day release of redhat, which I still have on an old infomagic cd pack sitting on the shelf above my desk (for giggles), was not a "replacement" for a pizzabox in any far remote sense of the word.
Linux's earliest intent was to be a hobby plaything. It was for people who wanted to tinker around and play their hand at writing a device driver, or otherwise really know what it was their PC was doing. As for Linux being disruptive to UNIX - no, it wasn't. It was just cheap/free UNIX clone ala MINIX and other "learn-what-is-really-happening" educational tools of the time, but it still held the same "do one thing, do it well" principle, it came from/was birthed from the community/culture of UNIX users of the time, thus had more or less that same community and their ideals. Linux also never coopted anything - it eventually matured enough to be a competitor to the giants that came before it. Poettering's stunt was pure agism, as was that which allowed it to succeed. Change for the sake of change is and has always been stupid - don't try to paint it as a cycle, that Linux started the same way. Linux was an educational tool, and 100% of the rebellion of it was communistic; Ubuntu quite literally was anti-community from the start, as a core principle - as is and was systemd.