The difference between us is I realize that both of us are rather fond of democracy; I (and other conservatives) just happen to realize Democracy takes some defending even if it means a few calls to known terrorists are tapped.
The difference between us is that I'm not a scared little monkey who willingly sacrifices EVERYTHING out of fear of some overrated boogeyman. Do you think our nation is more at risk now than it was during the American Revolution? Not fucking hardly. Osama bin Laden is nothing more than an Emmanuel Goldstein, and you, cowardly fascist that you are, WANT to absolve your country's principles out of fear.
Someone who claims that someone who protects Democracy is "The Enemy" is I've found someone who has reach the point where there is no reasoning with them. Yes, that's right - it's easier to get a southern baptist to accept gay people than it is to get a blowhard peace loving Democrat to accept that some times when foreign powers are actively trying to hurt U.S. interests that things need to get done.
Peace loving? You argue against strawmen, and think yourself insightful.
I support the war in Afghanistan. I support all efforts to keep those fucksticks in Iran from getting nukes. I supported the military action in Kosovo. I WOULD support military intervention in Sudan.
I do NOT support wholeheartedly throwing away my rights and giving imperial powers to a president in pursuit of those goals. And I am not alone. Your strawmen are pathetic, willfull lies. America's strength comes from it's democracy and its justice system, not its military. We are neither so threatened nor so weak as to necessitate a king who is above the law.
Equal justice FOR ALL, and death to those who oppose it.
Suck my dick. Modern day conservatives are nothing more that apologists for tyranny, murder, criminality, and rampant immorality. They seek nothing other than power through fear, and are worthy of nothing less than the gallows.
You know what? I'm not even going to debate you. I'm not going to tell you why you are wrong, not out of cowardice, or a weak case, or anything similar. It is simply because you are the enemy. You are my enemy. You and people like you stand against everything I believe in, in a very real and active sense, and I have through long experience realized the fruitlessness of trying to convince through reason of the errors of your ways. You will continue to support the imperial presidency, no matter what, and will march lockstep to whatever drum the government propaganda machine tells you to, to your doom if they ask.
So you are my enemy. You and those like you are the enemy of all those who cherish democracy, liberty, and justice. You are not American, you are not good, you are not anything other than the very type of person we fought against when we founded this nation.
For those still following this thread, an archived version of the page with the later-deleted comments has been put on Democratic Underground. Discussion about this at Daily Kos, including a list of which comments were specifically deleted.
Re:Problem is not with refesh
on
Web 3.0
·
· Score: 1
It is with the back button. Try it with gmail and opera. It doesn't work as expected. Refresh don't matter, gmail does a "loading" thing and if your on a fast con you don't really see the refreshing anyway.
Right. But user's get used to it shortly. People are starting to realize that without a visible page refresh their back button won't behave as expected.
And you'd be surprised how integrated Web 2.0 stuff has already become. I, um, kinda came across a copy of iLife 06 the other day and decided to go ahead and sign up for.mac for a year, test it out. The mail interface for.mac is completely old-school, and feels very dated. Ditto some of the other things.mac offers, such as the address book and calendar. There's nothing dynamic/Ajaxian/Web2.0/whatever in there, and it would benefit greatly from having it.
In any event, "Web 2.0" is just a descriptive term to indicate more interactive web applications that depend less on page refreshes than their predecessors. *shrug* No biggie. I'm not going to get into a semantical argument about whether it's REALLY 2.0 or not; seems silly to me to do so.
Re:Web 2.0: Where solutions don't need problems?
on
Web 3.0
·
· Score: 1
Because it'd be stupid, the main point is to built incremetally on a stable base. XMLHTTP is NOT a stable base, it's not a base at all and it has 0 stability.
What the freakin' hell are you talking about? XHR has been around since IE4, and is firmly entrenched in all the Gecko-browsers and Safari, as well as Opera, iCab and all the other niche browsers. I've been using XHR for years and it's worked just fine for that entire time, thanks.
I am a libertarian. And you're a stupid fucking socialist, by the sound of it.
I know you think so, because in your mythology there are really only two camps: freedom-loving libertarians who worship at the alter of the perfect and holy Free Market, and socialists, who are to be hated with all the hate that can be mustered because they attempt to subvert the perfect and holy Free Market.
Capitalism works quite well in many situations. It also is inherently flawed in many others. From the libertarian literature that I have read this does indeed make me a socialist, but I find such a definition stupid in the extreme.
Thank the gods that you and yours will never be anything more than impotent, powerless gits. I can't imagine the dystopian abomination you'd force on the rest of us, should you ever be more than a fringe element.
How many libertarian nations are there again? I forget.
The thing is I don't care about the success of socialism. I DO care about the survivability of humanity and the various plant and animal species that make up this incredibly rare and precious gem we call Earth. Your fanatical devotion to an economic philosophy is foolish, unscientific, and incredibly unwise. Capitalism unfettered by long-term wisdom could by its very nature be responsible for the utter destruction of the human race. That is not something that should be taken lightly or dismissed as lunatic ravings.
Not every story in nature has a happy ending. Most, in fact, do not.
I think that harnessing as much energy as possible can help achieve that goal.
It depends on the cost of getting that energy. The current regime is based upon oil and natural gas. That is destructive. If impeding growth ensures future survivability, then so be it.
Don't be so quick to dismiss capitalists like myself. When you take a long-term view to investment and 'care-taking' (for the lack of a better word), the viewpoints of a capitalist can be quite reasonable. It's the robber-barons that give us a bad name.
I don't care about capitalism. I don't care about any -ism. I do care about what works best, and ascertaining as best I can the truth. The truths that I see are that capitalism is good for many situations but severely and naturally flawed in many others. Capitalism could very conceivably be the root cause of the downfall of humanity and millions of plant and animal species.
But right now, our energy consumption/generation on a cosmological scale can be easily rounded off to ZERO.
True, but irrelevant and missing the point besides. It is not how much energy humans use on a cosmological scale that is the issue, which is obviously insignificant. The point is that the window of sustainability, the brackets between which life can and cannot be sustained, are precariously narrow, and if our short-sighted appetite for energy pushes beyond one end of that bracket then we as a species are fucked.
The only thing it takes is time, and energy. On a very large, very grand scale.
Which energy we do not have, and there is no law written into the universe which says that we must, or that we are destined for the stars. There is the distinct possibility that we are, in fact, stuck here for eternity, and that no amount of mucking around with physics will fix.
And even if we can, in the meantime we should keep our house in order. It's just wise.
I don't want less power, I want *more* power. More power to do whatever I please, whenever I please.
Your desires have nothing to do with the way the universe works. I'd like to be Jesus Christ, but it ain't gonna happen.
If you're talking about making power so plentiful it goes for pennies on the dollar at todays prices, I'm with you. If you're going to go off on some environmental rant about how we should all live on tiny amounts of power, use solar heaters, and grow organic vegetables in our back yards, then forget that shit - I'm not interested.
Tough guy bullshit. You stupid fuck. Look at the universe around you. Cheap energy is a historical blip, and there is nothing written into the laws that govern the universe that says it should or will continue indefinitely.You sound like some stupid fucking libertarian, living life with complete disregard for the effects of their actions.
Do you have any recommendations for getting more information about this, websites or newsletters? I'm leaning towards buying either previous minerals or stock in companies like you listed, but I'm relatively new at this and am still looking to educate myself. Any recommendations would be welcome.
Oh for crying out loud get over yourself. Cringely is intelligent, interesting, and knows the industry better than most. If you don't like it when/. posts links to his columns then freaking hit the scroll wheel and quit your whining.
CHRIST people are babies around here sometimes. +5 Informative my ass.
1) You are a stupid fuck. 2) What the fuck does that have to do with anything? 3) Come 2pm do what you usually do and go turn on Hannity and pull your dick out. Not only will it validate you but it'll keep you from posting stupid shit like that for a few hours.
His story has been confirmed by many others, and you carrying water for Karl Rove does your nation no favors. Bush broke the law. He did not notify the FISA court when he was required by law to do so, even within the 72-hour grace period.
How does this change the importance of the underlying issue? Mounting character attacks against accusers are cute, but they are obvious distractions. Bush broke the law and should be impeached.
how does that fact render any point moot about apple invading privacy?
Because (a) no personal information is sent and (b) it can be turned off via a simple button that is immediately available and apparent to the user.
If microsoft was doing this, you'd be flinging your poop like an angry baboon.
Absolutely not. Microsoft is apparently coming out with a PVR of some kind, or at least it has been rumored for some time. I would expect their PVR to issue recommendations a la TiVo. I would no more rail against Microsoft for doing so than I would against TiVo.
Because it does not appear to be a threat. Many devices do things similar to this; TiVo immediately springs to mind. And if Microsoft came out with a PVR that suggested programs to the viewer it would be little different, and it would be similarly unjust to accuse them of violating privacy.
Re:Oh, build a damned bridge....
on
iTunes is Malware?
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Question: How can it in any way be construed as "secret" when it takes up approximately 20% of the application's window?
In the end, I don't know what stranglehold or blackmail Steve Jobs has against other Apple execs, but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon. The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.
Oh my fucking god, you have GOT to be joking. Apple is having (a) record growth (b) record profits and (c) a stock price that keeps going up and up and up. What in the holy hell are you talking about? They are respected and make excellent products that consumers love and have captured a large amount of mindshare. The executives would be completely RETARDED to get rid of Jobs. He's an excellent CEO. Much better than, I think, you are.
Put down the crack pipe, baby. Or maybe it's a anti-Jobs pipe? Whatevah, you need to think about quitting.:)
I just found iBank last night. I've been messing with it since then, and it seems interesting. MIght be worth checking out. It certainly is better than Quicken/Mac. So far, anyway.
I recall seeing an interview with George Lucas back during the heyday (shudder) of America's Funniest Home Videos. He held that show up as a perfect example of how control was becoming more decentralized and that we would soon see artists arise from this new world of home video cameras.
It never happened, of course. About the closest thing to it was "Blair Witch Project", and while I happened to think that was a pretty fun movie, it certainly was NOT Stanley Kubrick/David Lynch/insert your favorite arthouse director here.
Create a new tab. In that new tab type a URL to load, then immediately switch back to the first tab you had open and start typing. About two words into your typing, the new tab will load the site and jump to the front, stealing focus from the work you were doing. Try it.
Ok, did. Didn't behave as you described.
To add insult to injury, making a Smart Folder almost always crashes Finder when more than about 800-1000 items are in it. So the GUI sucks, *and* it crashes.
Just did, seems to work fine. Created a Smart Folder that contains all images in my home directory, or 3948 files. Works fine.
Did another one that searches for all matches against the word "the", or 8,370 matches. Works fine.
I think you may be having issues with your system. This is on a "sunflower" G4 iMac with 1G RAM.
Clinton was quite explicit in including religious references in his speeches, and made the show of going to church. Jimmy Carter was an overt born again southern baptist. I believe your discomfort with Bush has far more to do with politics than any real religious grounds.
Bullshit. Neither Clinton nor Carter pushed for judges who desire to eliminate church-state separation, nor did they advocate using taxpayer monies to fund so-called "faith-based" groups, nor did they attempt to force their creation myth upon schoolchildren, nor did they otherwise cowtow to the extreme religious fundamentalists.
Proving, of course, that it is not the Christianity that is the problem, but rather the problem lies with the mixing of religion and the public sphere. I could care less that either man is a Christian, because they did not attempt to force their religion upon me or my children. George Bush has, and does, and for that reason, among many, he is abhorred by those who value freedom of thought.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes. Next question.
The difference between us is I realize that both of us are rather fond of democracy; I (and other conservatives) just happen to realize Democracy takes some defending even if it means a few calls to known terrorists are tapped.
The difference between us is that I'm not a scared little monkey who willingly sacrifices EVERYTHING out of fear of some overrated boogeyman. Do you think our nation is more at risk now than it was during the American Revolution? Not fucking hardly. Osama bin Laden is nothing more than an Emmanuel Goldstein, and you, cowardly fascist that you are, WANT to absolve your country's principles out of fear.
Someone who claims that someone who protects Democracy is "The Enemy" is I've found someone who has reach the point where there is no reasoning with them. Yes, that's right - it's easier to get a southern baptist to accept gay people than it is to get a blowhard peace loving Democrat to accept that some times when foreign powers are actively trying to hurt U.S. interests that things need to get done.
Peace loving? You argue against strawmen, and think yourself insightful.
I support the war in Afghanistan. I support all efforts to keep those fucksticks in Iran from getting nukes. I supported the military action in Kosovo. I WOULD support military intervention in Sudan.
I do NOT support wholeheartedly throwing away my rights and giving imperial powers to a president in pursuit of those goals. And I am not alone. Your strawmen are pathetic, willfull lies. America's strength comes from it's democracy and its justice system, not its military. We are neither so threatened nor so weak as to necessitate a king who is above the law.
Equal justice FOR ALL, and death to those who oppose it.
Suck my dick. Modern day conservatives are nothing more that apologists for tyranny, murder, criminality, and rampant immorality. They seek nothing other than power through fear, and are worthy of nothing less than the gallows.
So you are my enemy. You and those like you are the enemy of all those who cherish democracy, liberty, and justice. You are not American, you are not good, you are not anything other than the very type of person we fought against when we founded this nation.
Fuck. You.
For those still following this thread, an archived version of the page with the later-deleted comments has been put on Democratic Underground. Discussion about this at Daily Kos, including a list of which comments were specifically deleted.
It is with the back button. Try it with gmail and opera. It doesn't work as expected. Refresh don't matter, gmail does a "loading" thing and if your on a fast con you don't really see the refreshing anyway.
Right. But user's get used to it shortly. People are starting to realize that without a visible page refresh their back button won't behave as expected.
And you'd be surprised how integrated Web 2.0 stuff has already become. I, um, kinda came across a copy of iLife 06 the other day and decided to go ahead and sign up for .mac for a year, test it out. The mail interface for.mac is completely old-school, and feels very dated. Ditto some of the other things .mac offers, such as the address book and calendar. There's nothing dynamic/Ajaxian/Web2.0/whatever in there, and it would benefit greatly from having it.
In any event, "Web 2.0" is just a descriptive term to indicate more interactive web applications that depend less on page refreshes than their predecessors. *shrug* No biggie. I'm not going to get into a semantical argument about whether it's REALLY 2.0 or not; seems silly to me to do so.
Because it'd be stupid, the main point is to built incremetally on a stable base. XMLHTTP is NOT a stable base, it's not a base at all and it has 0 stability.
What the freakin' hell are you talking about? XHR has been around since IE4, and is firmly entrenched in all the Gecko-browsers and Safari, as well as Opera, iCab and all the other niche browsers. I've been using XHR for years and it's worked just fine for that entire time, thanks.
I am a libertarian. And you're a stupid fucking socialist, by the sound of it.
I know you think so, because in your mythology there are really only two camps: freedom-loving libertarians who worship at the alter of the perfect and holy Free Market, and socialists, who are to be hated with all the hate that can be mustered because they attempt to subvert the perfect and holy Free Market.
Capitalism works quite well in many situations. It also is inherently flawed in many others. From the libertarian literature that I have read this does indeed make me a socialist, but I find such a definition stupid in the extreme.
Thank the gods that you and yours will never be anything more than impotent, powerless gits. I can't imagine the dystopian abomination you'd force on the rest of us, should you ever be more than a fringe element.
How many libertarian nations are there again? I forget.
The thing is I don't care about the success of socialism. I DO care about the survivability of humanity and the various plant and animal species that make up this incredibly rare and precious gem we call Earth. Your fanatical devotion to an economic philosophy is foolish, unscientific, and incredibly unwise. Capitalism unfettered by long-term wisdom could by its very nature be responsible for the utter destruction of the human race. That is not something that should be taken lightly or dismissed as lunatic ravings.
Not every story in nature has a happy ending. Most, in fact, do not.
I think that harnessing as much energy as possible can help achieve that goal.
It depends on the cost of getting that energy. The current regime is based upon oil and natural gas. That is destructive. If impeding growth ensures future survivability, then so be it.
Don't be so quick to dismiss capitalists like myself. When you take a long-term view to investment and 'care-taking' (for the lack of a better word), the viewpoints of a capitalist can be quite reasonable. It's the robber-barons that give us a bad name.
I don't care about capitalism. I don't care about any -ism. I do care about what works best, and ascertaining as best I can the truth. The truths that I see are that capitalism is good for many situations but severely and naturally flawed in many others. Capitalism could very conceivably be the root cause of the downfall of humanity and millions of plant and animal species.
But right now, our energy consumption/generation on a cosmological scale can be easily rounded off to ZERO.
True, but irrelevant and missing the point besides. It is not how much energy humans use on a cosmological scale that is the issue, which is obviously insignificant. The point is that the window of sustainability, the brackets between which life can and cannot be sustained, are precariously narrow, and if our short-sighted appetite for energy pushes beyond one end of that bracket then we as a species are fucked.
The only thing it takes is time, and energy. On a very large, very grand scale.
Which energy we do not have, and there is no law written into the universe which says that we must, or that we are destined for the stars. There is the distinct possibility that we are, in fact, stuck here for eternity, and that no amount of mucking around with physics will fix.
And even if we can, in the meantime we should keep our house in order. It's just wise.
I don't want less power, I want *more* power. More power to do whatever I please, whenever I please.
Your desires have nothing to do with the way the universe works. I'd like to be Jesus Christ, but it ain't gonna happen.
If you're talking about making power so plentiful it goes for pennies on the dollar at todays prices, I'm with you. If you're going to go off on some environmental rant about how we should all live on tiny amounts of power, use solar heaters, and grow organic vegetables in our back yards, then forget that shit - I'm not interested.
Tough guy bullshit. You stupid fuck. Look at the universe around you. Cheap energy is a historical blip, and there is nothing written into the laws that govern the universe that says it should or will continue indefinitely.You sound like some stupid fucking libertarian, living life with complete disregard for the effects of their actions.
Do you have any recommendations for getting more information about this, websites or newsletters? I'm leaning towards buying either previous minerals or stock in companies like you listed, but I'm relatively new at this and am still looking to educate myself. Any recommendations would be welcome.
CHRIST people are babies around here sometimes. +5 Informative my ass.
1) You are a stupid fuck.
2) What the fuck does that have to do with anything?
3) Come 2pm do what you usually do and go turn on Hannity and pull your dick out. Not only will it validate you but it'll keep you from posting stupid shit like that for a few hours.
Support the law, not the party. Come on, man.
How does this change the importance of the underlying issue? Mounting character attacks against accusers are cute, but they are obvious distractions. Bush broke the law and should be impeached.
how does that fact render any point moot about apple invading privacy?
Because (a) no personal information is sent and (b) it can be turned off via a simple button that is immediately available and apparent to the user.
If microsoft was doing this, you'd be flinging your poop like an angry baboon.
Absolutely not. Microsoft is apparently coming out with a PVR of some kind, or at least it has been rumored for some time. I would expect their PVR to issue recommendations a la TiVo. I would no more rail against Microsoft for doing so than I would against TiVo.
WTF? Where has all the anger gone?
Because it does not appear to be a threat. Many devices do things similar to this; TiVo immediately springs to mind. And if Microsoft came out with a PVR that suggested programs to the viewer it would be little different, and it would be similarly unjust to accuse them of violating privacy.
Question: How can it in any way be construed as "secret" when it takes up approximately 20% of the application's window?
I predict a plethora of pithy pundits posting proclamations of the propriety of this product, pardoned by Apple's previous possible pilfering.
In the end, I don't know what stranglehold or blackmail Steve Jobs has against other Apple execs, but if the rest of them were smart, they would drop Steve Jobs like a lead balloon. The only problem is, Apple execs have never shown one drop of intelligence in their entire history of the company.
Oh my fucking god, you have GOT to be joking. Apple is having (a) record growth (b) record profits and (c) a stock price that keeps going up and up and up. What in the holy hell are you talking about? They are respected and make excellent products that consumers love and have captured a large amount of mindshare. The executives would be completely RETARDED to get rid of Jobs. He's an excellent CEO. Much better than, I think, you are.
Put down the crack pipe, baby. Or maybe it's a anti-Jobs pipe? Whatevah, you need to think about quitting. :)
I just found iBank last night. I've been messing with it since then, and it seems interesting. MIght be worth checking out. It certainly is better than Quicken/Mac. So far, anyway.
It never happened, of course. About the closest thing to it was "Blair Witch Project", and while I happened to think that was a pretty fun movie, it certainly was NOT Stanley Kubrick/David Lynch/insert your favorite arthouse director here.
Create a new tab. In that new tab type a URL to load, then immediately switch back to the first tab you had open and start typing. About two words into your typing, the new tab will load the site and jump to the front, stealing focus from the work you were doing. Try it.
Ok, did. Didn't behave as you described.
To add insult to injury, making a Smart Folder almost always crashes Finder when more than about 800-1000 items are in it. So the GUI sucks, *and* it crashes.
Just did, seems to work fine. Created a Smart Folder that contains all images in my home directory, or 3948 files. Works fine.
Did another one that searches for all matches against the word "the", or 8,370 matches. Works fine.
I think you may be having issues with your system. This is on a "sunflower" G4 iMac with 1G RAM.
Clinton was quite explicit in including religious references in his speeches, and made the show of going to church. Jimmy Carter was an overt born again southern baptist. I believe your discomfort with Bush has far more to do with politics than any real religious grounds.
Bullshit. Neither Clinton nor Carter pushed for judges who desire to eliminate church-state separation, nor did they advocate using taxpayer monies to fund so-called "faith-based" groups, nor did they attempt to force their creation myth upon schoolchildren, nor did they otherwise cowtow to the extreme religious fundamentalists.
Proving, of course, that it is not the Christianity that is the problem, but rather the problem lies with the mixing of religion and the public sphere. I could care less that either man is a Christian, because they did not attempt to force their religion upon me or my children. George Bush has, and does, and for that reason, among many, he is abhorred by those who value freedom of thought.