Why? Sci-Fi nerds were supposed to appreciate science but not people who were obsessed with dragons. Weird.
I'd go a little further and say that another reason was that adults at the time were familiar with Star Wars (and the elements of Christian allegory therein), but were ignorant of D&D game play. As a result, it was a simple matter for fear-mongering elements of certain religious persuasions to raise a ruckus about the game.
Andreessen's valuation of bitcoin doesn't rest solely on bitcoin's value as a currency. From the DealB%k article:
"...Bitcoin gives us, for the first time, a way for one Internet user to transfer a unique piece of digital property to another Internet user...What kinds of digital property might be transferred in this way? Think about digital signatures, digital contracts, digital keys (to physical locks, or to online lockers), digital ownership of physical assets such as cars and houses, digital stocks and bonds and digital money."
So it looks to me like he believes the technology underlying bitcoin as a currency can be leveraged to enable all kinds of transactions - not just purchases of goods and services.
While I tend to agree with the points made by Glenn Fleishman where he challenges bitcoin's utility as a currency, I think Andreessen's broader vision of the utility of bitcoin still stands.
I know what you mean. Look at this weight lifting scene from a prison documentary. Everyone looks happy and like they want to be there. Obviously prison isn't so bad and we can safely ignore reports of crowded cells, fights, boredom, despair, and other troubles.
LOL
Maybe I misread something along the way, but the DB article appeared to me to be about the same facility as the promo video for the documentary. The same specific facility.
So with two sources of information about a specific facility presented to me, I simply said I gave more weight to the information in the video as opposed to the (IMO) clearly sensationalist Beast article. I did not say I or you or anyone else should ignore the Beast article
But nice try at putting words into my mouth (though I wounder why you would try to do such a thing in the first place).
What a stark contrast. The Daily Beast article speaks of "prison" and "bizarre hybrid" and "wires and nodes" and "forced medication", while the promotional clip for the movie posted on Wired shows the supposed victims of this cruel outrage sitting around in a decent environment playing cards, happily shooting the BS, and generally enjoying their leisure time.
I think I'll put more weight on the video and less on the sensationalist Beast article.
Yes, the FISA court is ultimately responsible to the Supreme Court, just like other courts (in an ideal world)
True, but the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the actions of the FISC. So it remains to be seen if the FISC is really a "court".
In 1978, Congress passed the original version of FISA, which for the first time established a procedure by which the executive branch was required to seek authorization to conduct foreign surveillance activities. 4 FISA also created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISA Court of Review). 5 These courts are staffed by federal court judges appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the decisions of the FISA Court of Review are reviewable by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In other words, Congress (in collusion with the executive) wrote a byzantine law to subvert the Constitution. Thanks for making my point.
The only court defined in the Constitution is the Supreme Court. Everything else is created by Congress, as is their power as granted in the Constitution.
How is your theory holding up?
Yes, inferior courts are a creation of Congress, and it is certainly true that the Constitution grants Congress the authority to create them. You got me! My "theory" is toast!
Except that under the Constitution, decisions by inferior courts created by Congress are subject to review by the Supreme Court. What Congress did with the FISC was to create a court-like thingy that isn't accountable to the Supreme Court. IOW, NOT inferior to the Supreme Court. Therefore (IMO), the FISC doesn't qualify as part of the judiciary (even if it has "court" in its name).
The FISA court judges are already judges on the Federal bench.
[blah blah]
The FISA "court" is a creation of the legislative branch of the US government. As such, It can be eliminated by the legislative branch of the US government with the stroke of a pen. Guess what? That means the FISC is NOT a "court" in the context of the US Constitution.
Since when did the doomsday clock include climate change? Since Al Gore became master of earth?
Call me crazy or old but I thought it was about nuclear holocaust.
This.
I was around back in the "duck and cover" days, and the doomsday clock might've meant something back then. Now? Not so much.
I think the fact that they've added climate change and "threat from inability to manage emerging technologies" (whatever the fsck that's supposed to mean) to their time setting rationale just goes to show how desperate they are to remain relevant.
"The settlement requires MPHJ to reveal its true identity to targets, describe with "reasonable specificity" its claims, and have a good faith basis for claiming infringements."
The settlement also appears to provide a mechanism for parties who paid MPHJ to "void their license" with MPHJ and get their money back
...after all it's the same network [CBS] that has or had Maddow, Mathews, and Olbermann on it and they've always had their faces stuck to the ass of the democratic party.
Mod +5 Informative!
It's only gotten worse in the last few years, to the point where they've become a full-on propaganda arm for the democrats and especially the Obama administration.
Wait...I thought this story was about 60 Minutes/CBS airing a hit piece on "Cleantech"...isn't that an Obama/Democrat favorite?
Maybe this signals that CBS is transitioning to becoming a full-on propaganda arm for the Republicans. Great news!
Given that the governments in New York and New Jersey don't even give lip service to actually having the best interests of the people at heart, shouldn't the ownership of critical infrastructure, held in trust for the people, be in the hands of someone else?
Maybe it wasn't clear in my post...the infrastructure managed by the PANYNJ (an interstate agency) isn't in the hands of the governments of NY or NJ. In fact, the creation of the Port Authority was (in large part) to remove the influence and corruption of local/state politics:
"The idea for the Port Authority was conceived during the Progressive Era, which aimed at the reduction of political corruption and at increasing the efficiency of government. With the Port Authority at a distance from political pressures, it was able to carry longer-term infrastructure projects irrespective of the election cycles and in a more efficient manner."
Current scandal aside, I think they've actually done a pretty decent job - considering the cesspool of corruption in that part of the country.
What I want to know, is why any state's DOT would take orders like that EVEN if they thought it came from the Governor himself.
Most rational state governments do not allow the Governor to micro-manage road and lane closures, for non-emergency reasons, and when there is a real emergency need, the DOT is usually well ahead of the elected officials.
Why does New Jersey allow a governor to make that call?
NY and NJ DOTs have nothing to do with it. The GWB is run by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey which separate from the state governments. The only reason the NJ governor's office was able to pull this off was because of their appointees & other cronies inside the PANYNJ.
With Thomas Wheeler running the FCC? Good luck with that.
How true. Even further, I doubt anyone who would support removing the common carrier exemption will ever be considered for the chair of the FCC in the future.
As one of the best examples of regulatory capture in the US government these days, I can't help but think that the FCC's actions are nothing more than going through the motions in order to appear that they are serving the public.
If you would have taken the time to actually read the news you would have known that the shooter had to leave the theater to retrieve his gun from the car.
Where are you getting this information? The linked NYT article says nothing about the shooter leaving to retrieve his gun.
When I got home, my girlfiend (not a typo) took one look at my hair and left me. But that's ok because I just got a REAL girlfriend, and she is AWESOME!!!.
Slashdot Mirror
No doubt caused by global warming... I'm sure.
Everyone knows earthquakes are caused by evolutionism. Especially in the Midwest.
Why? Sci-Fi nerds were supposed to appreciate science but not people who were obsessed with dragons. Weird.
I'd go a little further and say that another reason was that adults at the time were familiar with Star Wars (and the elements of Christian allegory therein), but were ignorant of D&D game play. As a result, it was a simple matter for fear-mongering elements of certain religious persuasions to raise a ruckus about the game.
...when disaffected nerdy kids could lock themselves away to play for hours and hours and hours without fear of getting sent to Chinese rehabs.
Of course, players back then had to worry about being burned at the stake.
Who wouldn't enjoy the government's finger on a kill switch for all your electronic transactions? That is harder to do with cash.
Non sequitur. Not the logic kind, the literary kind.
Andreessen's valuation of bitcoin doesn't rest solely on bitcoin's value as a currency. From the DealB%k article:
"...Bitcoin gives us, for the first time, a way for one Internet user to transfer a unique piece of digital property to another Internet user...What kinds of digital property might be transferred in this way? Think about digital signatures, digital contracts, digital keys (to physical locks, or to online lockers), digital ownership of physical assets such as cars and houses, digital stocks and bonds and digital money."
So it looks to me like he believes the technology underlying bitcoin as a currency can be leveraged to enable all kinds of transactions - not just purchases of goods and services.
While I tend to agree with the points made by Glenn Fleishman where he challenges bitcoin's utility as a currency, I think Andreessen's broader vision of the utility of bitcoin still stands.
I know what you mean. Look at this weight lifting scene from a prison documentary. Everyone looks happy and like they want to be there. Obviously prison isn't so bad and we can safely ignore reports of crowded cells, fights, boredom, despair, and other troubles.
LOL
Maybe I misread something along the way, but the DB article appeared to me to be about the same facility as the promo video for the documentary. The same specific facility.
So with two sources of information about a specific facility presented to me, I simply said I gave more weight to the information in the video as opposed to the (IMO) clearly sensationalist Beast article. I did not say I or you or anyone else should ignore the Beast article
But nice try at putting words into my mouth (though I wounder why you would try to do such a thing in the first place).
What a stark contrast. The Daily Beast article speaks of "prison" and "bizarre hybrid" and "wires and nodes" and "forced medication", while the promotional clip for the movie posted on Wired shows the supposed victims of this cruel outrage sitting around in a decent environment playing cards, happily shooting the BS, and generally enjoying their leisure time.
I think I'll put more weight on the video and less on the sensationalist Beast article.
Yes, the FISA court is ultimately responsible to the Supreme Court, just like other courts (in an ideal world)
True, but the Supreme Court has yet to rule on the actions of the FISC. So it remains to be seen if the FISC is really a "court".
In 1978, Congress passed the original version of FISA, which for the first time established a procedure by which the executive branch was required to seek authorization to conduct foreign surveillance activities. 4 FISA also created the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review (FISA Court of Review). 5 These courts are staffed by federal court judges appointed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, and the decisions of the FISA Court of Review are reviewable by the U.S. Supreme Court.
In other words, Congress (in collusion with the executive) wrote a byzantine law to subvert the Constitution. Thanks for making my point.
You're not the sharpest troll in the box, son.
The only court defined in the Constitution is the Supreme Court. Everything else is created by Congress, as is their power as granted in the Constitution.
How is your theory holding up?
Yes, inferior courts are a creation of Congress, and it is certainly true that the Constitution grants Congress the authority to create them. You got me! My "theory" is toast!
Except that under the Constitution, decisions by inferior courts created by Congress are subject to review by the Supreme Court. What Congress did with the FISC was to create a court-like thingy that isn't accountable to the Supreme Court. IOW, NOT inferior to the Supreme Court. Therefore (IMO), the FISC doesn't qualify as part of the judiciary (even if it has "court" in its name).
The FISA court judges are already judges on the Federal bench.
[blah blah]
The FISA "court" is a creation of the legislative branch of the US government. As such, It can be eliminated by the legislative branch of the US government with the stroke of a pen. Guess what? That means the FISC is NOT a "court" in the context of the US Constitution.
We need more guys like Dobson. RIP.
Since when did the doomsday clock include climate change? Since Al Gore became master of earth?
Call me crazy or old but I thought it was about nuclear holocaust.
This.
I was around back in the "duck and cover" days, and the doomsday clock might've meant something back then. Now? Not so much.
I think the fact that they've added climate change and "threat from inability to manage emerging technologies" (whatever the fsck that's supposed to mean) to their time setting rationale just goes to show how desperate they are to remain relevant.
Looks like MPHJ has settled in New York:
The settlement also appears to provide a mechanism for parties who paid MPHJ to "void their license" with MPHJ and get their money back
NY AG's press release here.
Full text of settlement (Assurance of Discontinuance) here.
...after all it's the same network [CBS] that has or had Maddow, Mathews, and Olbermann on it and they've always had their faces stuck to the ass of the democratic party.
Mod +5 Informative!
It's only gotten worse in the last few years, to the point where they've become a full-on propaganda arm for the democrats and especially the Obama administration.
Wait...I thought this story was about 60 Minutes/CBS airing a hit piece on "Cleantech"...isn't that an Obama/Democrat favorite?
Maybe this signals that CBS is transitioning to becoming a full-on propaganda arm for the Republicans. Great news!
My version is using the Nullsoft FLAC Decoder v3.03 and I haven't had any trouble with playing FLAC either. Maybe GP will elaborate...
I think GP might be referring to AMD's Mantle API. Apparently Battlefield 4 supports it.
He forgot to include the words "pedophiles" and "terrorists" in his call for a crackdown. I would've expected better from an Irishman.
Given that the governments in New York and New Jersey don't even give lip service to actually having the best interests of the people at heart, shouldn't the ownership of critical infrastructure, held in trust for the people, be in the hands of someone else?
Maybe it wasn't clear in my post...the infrastructure managed by the PANYNJ (an interstate agency) isn't in the hands of the governments of NY or NJ. In fact, the creation of the Port Authority was (in large part) to remove the influence and corruption of local/state politics:
Current scandal aside, I think they've actually done a pretty decent job - considering the cesspool of corruption in that part of the country.
Technically, the DOJ and Treasury aren't regulatory bodies. But I get your drift.
That being said, can you provide links for your version of this information?
Here.
What I want to know, is why any state's DOT would take orders like that EVEN if they thought it came from the Governor himself. Most rational state governments do not allow the Governor to micro-manage road and lane closures, for non-emergency reasons, and when there is a real emergency need, the DOT is usually well ahead of the elected officials.
Why does New Jersey allow a governor to make that call?
NY and NJ DOTs have nothing to do with it. The GWB is run by the Port Authority of New York & New Jersey which separate from the state governments. The only reason the NJ governor's office was able to pull this off was because of their appointees & other cronies inside the PANYNJ.
With Thomas Wheeler running the FCC? Good luck with that.
How true. Even further, I doubt anyone who would support removing the common carrier exemption will ever be considered for the chair of the FCC in the future.
As one of the best examples of regulatory capture in the US government these days, I can't help but think that the FCC's actions are nothing more than going through the motions in order to appear that they are serving the public.
If you would have taken the time to actually read the news you would have known that the shooter had to leave the theater to retrieve his gun from the car.
Where are you getting this information? The linked NYT article says nothing about the shooter leaving to retrieve his gun.
...there will still be cooks, stylists, hairdressers, ...).
No there won't.
Just the other day I ate some savory pancakes before going to my hairdresser for a cut.
When I got home, my girlfiend (not a typo) took one look at my hair and left me. But that's ok because I just got a REAL girlfriend, and she is AWESOME!!!.