So IOW: When a simple question is proposed to you, you avoid it and stoke you're ego by telling yourself it's all for your own amusement, that arguing with an idiot for sport.
Great. Wonderful. I'm a complete idiot. Utterly and completely retarded, unable to tie my own shoes. I also eat babies, have an altar to Michael Moore, and give money regularly to both al Qaeda and Kim Jong Ill.
Now, as for the original question, which you have yet to do anything but not-so-cleverly avoid: "Q: Is Bush responsible for American energy policy? If there are criticisms to be made of same, who should shoulder responsibility for that criticism?"
Your avoidance proves my point: that the Republicans have a pathological obsession with avoiding taking responsibility, even in the abstract, and self-criticism is deeply taboo. That makes you not only a coward but a fool as well.
While Ache is not 'as' populated, overhead shows some massive coastal devistation. (Overhead being satellite imagery - black and white (optical) / infra red / radar)
NPR reported this morning that the governor of Ache was estimating as many as 20,000 dead in that province *alone*.
For those that care about politics...
on
Amazon Sales Record
·
· Score: 1, Offtopic
where did you miss me say "it is most important to remember that thousands died needlessly" in my original post?
But that wasn't the topic of your post. The topic of your post will be "this is going to make America look bad." You're perfectly and rightfully free to say whatever you want, but that doesn't mean you're not a complete and utter bastard.
Tell me, how does it feel not to be taken seriously?
Tell me, how does it feel to be an abject coward? Again, all you do is brush off criticisms with ad hominems, all the while failing to address the underlying issue, and chalk this up as "success".
Q: Is Bush responsible for American energy policy? If there are criticisms to be made of same, who should shoulder responsibility for that criticism?
Here's the part where you run away (again) and hide behind rhetorical trickery.
No technology will reshape that landscape. The thing that counts is not the tool that broadcasts content, it's the content itself.
Well, as I see it it has the potential (again, remote) of affecting things by finally putting to bed the lie about "interference" that the big media companies and (surprisingly) NPR claim will affect their signal. That could open the door for the microbroadcasting issue being revisited.
Content is important, but technology and regulations can be and is used to affect how that content is shaped.
How and why is this thing any more of a terrorist boon that other radios, the web, or cell phones?
Because it is a shot across the bow of the broadcast powers-that-be and their Republican cronies in congress. This device has the potential, however remote, to remake the broadcast landscape, and there are many powerful people who quite like the status quo. To restrict such devices they would need to show or invent a criminal use for it. "Terrorism" is the current scare word. Go back 80 years and replace it with "Jew" or, if you're in Texas, "gay" and you can rest assured that the population will quietly acquiesce to such a ban.
So you're denying that there are close ties between the Bush administration and the oil industry, or admitting it? Cuz from here, it just looks like you're avoiding the subject entirely.
Which makes you a coward. But you're a Republican, so I repeat myself.
So again you have nothing to say in reply besides offering up monumentally stupid straw-men? Ok, so we'll take it as fact then that you (a) disdain responsibility when things are the fault of the Republicans and (b) things are the fault of the Republicans.
If the Republicans wanted nuclear power, we'd have it. They're in the pockets of the oil and coal industries, so we don't.
You make accusations where there is no actual fact. How about we point some blame at Clinton for not proposing solutions for 8 years. Or even attempting to get Osama when he was offered on a plate (at least) twice.
Hahahahaha you're response is "Blame Clinton hey let's change the subject and talk about Osama!" Oh man, you're a walking cliche, aren't you?
If it wasn't for the idiot tree huggers who put a stop to nuclear power in the US, our air would be a lot cleaner right now.
Yes, I'm sure the reason that nuclear power is because of "tree huggers", a group who has had little political power at its peak and none at all for the past decade or so. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that nuclear power takes away from the profits of the oil and coal industries, and that the GOP is deep in the pockets of same. No, that whole link between Saudi and the Bush family is just a bunch of propaganda dreamed up by Michael Moore, and he's a fatass.
Bush is president. The Republicans control congress. You want to point the finger of blame somewhere point at those who have the power to change things but don't.
Why isn't anyone asking the question, "Why are WE not implementing IPv6 already?!"
Because Americans have been brought up to zealously defend the so-called free market, and any cognitive dissonance brought up by challenges to this meme are met with energetic ignoring.
Under many circumstances socialism works. But we're supposed to hate China because Fox News tells me America is more free, so let me dutifully say "At least I live in a free country". And now, back to Sean Hannity.
High-end 3D video cards and a faster processor. I'm talking about basically fitting the equivalent of a G5+ATI Radeon 9600 XT into an iPod, and just plugging it in to an inteface that ties into a monitor, keyboard, and mouse.
For me, software isn't the issue so much as the hardware is, both internal and the interface to peripherals.
I mean, we can see Apple are going for the digital lifestyle (iPod photo, iTunes, AirTunes etc.) but where are we actually going in terms of technology coming to the average user? I for one think that the bottleneck has to be our internet connections. Roll on household OC 48.
I agree with this. Personally, I see the future PC as being an enhanced iPod with a fatter pipe for interfacing with a regular display. Basically, I see the iPod becoming the PC, and you just carry it around with you and plug it in wherever you want to. It has your mail settings, address book, calendar, as well as the programs you like to use to interface with those. Your "home computer" would then be something you can carry with you, and just hook up at any place that has a connection.
Like most predictions, though, this will probably turn out 100% wrong. I can see it happening, though. The storage space is already there. All that's missing is an interface that is as fast as this would need to be. Perhaps the entire backplate could be a hardware interface...
I'm a Java developer for an enterprise-level J2EE shop. I happen to like Java: the rich libraries, the elegance that OO can bring, the cross platform support (we code in Windows, have Solaris and Linux for our staging environment, and deploy to Solaris.) I have no complaints about Java, and encourage its use.
Having said that, however, ultimately a decision like this shouldn't be made on techonological grounds. I haven't used.NET, and typically cringe at anything Microsoft, but for Festivus's sake if it makes business sense for you to use MS products, then do so.
Java will get the job done. I imagine that.NET will, as well. If this guy has currently on payroll people with experience in either one of these, then that's probably what he should go with.
I don't understand. So you're saying that through out the whole of America, it's not possible to use Bluetooth to connect to your phone, for anything? And it doesn't matter what carrier you choose or what phone model due to the carriers rigging the market?
Well, kinda. You *can* connect Bluetooth phones up, but you have to pay for the privelege to do so by going through the carrier's network first. Completely unnecessary and completely ridiculous. But with libertarians running things, it probably won't change any time soon.
This simply isn't true. You are a shortsighted and uninformed person with latent luddite tendencies. Please stop spreading FUD about computers.
Computers suck when it comes to teaching languages. Sorry, it's true. I happen to speak Japanese and Arabic, and I have *never* found a computer program that was worth a used butt cheek.
The best practice for language is sitting at a desk, reading, repeating to yourself, and writing the characters over and over and over - with your hand.
And before you label me a luddite as well, know that I'm a computer programmer with over 15 years of experience. I have no problem with technology, but computers do not help education nearly as much as they help business and entertainment.
In fact, studies have shown that computers in the classroom *decrease* the educational experience, something I find none to difficult to believe. Humans are the best teachers, not computers.
6) Most experts agree that this makes sense, they've agreed for a long long time (pre dot com days). The lobby against it has been from people who are more interested in their personal pocket books than the overall health of the financial system.
One more party is worth mentioning: free market fundamentalists. There are those who put this in the "regulation bad" bucket and discard it immediately as "increased bureaucracy". They wouldn't be worth worrying about except for the minor fact that they control the national fiscal agenda right now.
I simply would not accept that limitation from a carrier. It's an abuse of their service. Do the sensible thing and change you carrier to someone who doesn't cripple your phone and your computing experience.
That's the thing, though. You can't. In America, the providers have banded together on this one and locked-out such functionality. And with a free market fundamentalist for a president, for Americans this is unlikely to change via regulatory pressures from the communications commission.
Kudos to you for checking to make sure. Lord knows there are plenty of people who once they get an idea in their head won't bother to verify it later, and instead forever use it for fodder in the "My Favorite OS" religious wars.
But none of them are happy about it. We were raised, I guess, with those "moral values" that everyone's talking about. And I don't recall cheating on that list, anywhere. No, I take that back. There was "Cheaters never prosper" and "If you cheat, you only cheat yourself" and "Better to die for the truth then live a lie."
I wish there were more Republicans like you, instead of Sean Hannity/Limbaugh/random GOP apologist. The "good" Republicans seem to have been almost entirely sidelined, while those in power (Bush, Delay) are corrupt and willing to commit any crime in order to advance their power.
The last good Republican president was Dwight Eisenhower, and he's the one who warned against the "military industrial complex" that seems to have since successfully taken over a large part of the national agenda.
D'you think it's because North Carolina was John Edwards' home state, mebbe
Except, of course, that the errors were in Bush's favor. That means it's a vicious Democratic conspiracy, natch.
Look man, I'm a Democrat because the GOP has become so jaw-droppingly criminal and almost cult-like. And don't give me any of that "they're all corrupt" BS, because when it comes to corruption, no one can hold a candle to the modern Republican party. Don't believe me? Do your own research. I did, and was as surprised as anyone at the outcome.
Yes, there are crooks on both sides of the aisle. No, it is not a 50/50 split.
When it comes to vote fraud, though, if the Democrats had any balls they'd be stringing up certain Republicans up by their scrawny fascist necks. Justice freakin' demands it.
Adding metadata to the file system just causes gratuitous incompatibilities; there is no real benefit. Be tried it, Microsoft tried it, and Apple is trying it as well. In fact, this idea goes way, way back. In part, UNIX was intended to clean up this kind of mess.
LOL. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You're funny, though.
Slashdot Mirror
Great. Wonderful. I'm a complete idiot. Utterly and completely retarded, unable to tie my own shoes. I also eat babies, have an altar to Michael Moore, and give money regularly to both al Qaeda and Kim Jong Ill.
Now, as for the original question, which you have yet to do anything but not-so-cleverly avoid: "Q: Is Bush responsible for American energy policy? If there are criticisms to be made of same, who should shoulder responsibility for that criticism?"
Your avoidance proves my point: that the Republicans have a pathological obsession with avoiding taking responsibility, even in the abstract, and self-criticism is deeply taboo. That makes you not only a coward but a fool as well.
While Ache is not 'as' populated, overhead shows some massive coastal devistation. (Overhead being satellite imagery - black and white (optical) / infra red / radar)
NPR reported this morning that the governor of Ache was estimating as many as 20,000 dead in that province *alone*.
If you care: Amazon gives over 60% of its political donations to Republicans...
where did you miss me say "it is most important to remember that thousands died needlessly" in my original post?
But that wasn't the topic of your post. The topic of your post will be "this is going to make America look bad." You're perfectly and rightfully free to say whatever you want, but that doesn't mean you're not a complete and utter bastard.
Tell me, how does it feel not to be taken seriously?
Tell me, how does it feel to be an abject coward? Again, all you do is brush off criticisms with ad hominems, all the while failing to address the underlying issue, and chalk this up as "success".
Q: Is Bush responsible for American energy policy? If there are criticisms to be made of same, who should shoulder responsibility for that criticism?
Here's the part where you run away (again) and hide behind rhetorical trickery.
No technology will reshape that landscape. The thing that counts is not the tool that broadcasts content, it's the content itself.
Well, as I see it it has the potential (again, remote) of affecting things by finally putting to bed the lie about "interference" that the big media companies and (surprisingly) NPR claim will affect their signal. That could open the door for the microbroadcasting issue being revisited.
Content is important, but technology and regulations can be and is used to affect how that content is shaped.
Just? Not. Predominantly? Yes, absolutely. Money follows power.
How and why is this thing any more of a terrorist boon that other radios, the web, or cell phones?
Because it is a shot across the bow of the broadcast powers-that-be and their Republican cronies in congress. This device has the potential, however remote, to remake the broadcast landscape, and there are many powerful people who quite like the status quo. To restrict such devices they would need to show or invent a criminal use for it. "Terrorism" is the current scare word. Go back 80 years and replace it with "Jew" or, if you're in Texas, "gay" and you can rest assured that the population will quietly acquiesce to such a ban.
Which makes you a coward. But you're a Republican, so I repeat myself.
If the Republicans wanted nuclear power, we'd have it. They're in the pockets of the oil and coal industries, so we don't.
Gotcha.
You make accusations where there is no actual fact. How about we point some blame at Clinton for not proposing solutions for 8 years. Or even attempting to get Osama when he was offered on a plate (at least) twice.
Hahahahaha you're response is "Blame Clinton hey let's change the subject and talk about Osama!" Oh man, you're a walking cliche, aren't you?
Why do Republicans hate responsibility?
BTW: Cute kids.
If it wasn't for the idiot tree huggers who put a stop to nuclear power in the US, our air would be a lot cleaner right now.
Yes, I'm sure the reason that nuclear power is because of "tree huggers", a group who has had little political power at its peak and none at all for the past decade or so. I'm sure it has nothing to do with the fact that nuclear power takes away from the profits of the oil and coal industries, and that the GOP is deep in the pockets of same. No, that whole link between Saudi and the Bush family is just a bunch of propaganda dreamed up by Michael Moore, and he's a fatass.
Bush is president. The Republicans control congress. You want to point the finger of blame somewhere point at those who have the power to change things but don't.
Why isn't anyone asking the question, "Why are WE not implementing IPv6 already?!"
Because Americans have been brought up to zealously defend the so-called free market, and any cognitive dissonance brought up by challenges to this meme are met with energetic ignoring.
Under many circumstances socialism works. But we're supposed to hate China because Fox News tells me America is more free, so let me dutifully say "At least I live in a free country". And now, back to Sean Hannity.
For me, software isn't the issue so much as the hardware is, both internal and the interface to peripherals.
I mean, we can see Apple are going for the digital lifestyle (iPod photo, iTunes, AirTunes etc.) but where are we actually going in terms of technology coming to the average user? I for one think that the bottleneck has to be our internet connections. Roll on household OC 48.
I agree with this. Personally, I see the future PC as being an enhanced iPod with a fatter pipe for interfacing with a regular display. Basically, I see the iPod becoming the PC, and you just carry it around with you and plug it in wherever you want to. It has your mail settings, address book, calendar, as well as the programs you like to use to interface with those. Your "home computer" would then be something you can carry with you, and just hook up at any place that has a connection.
Like most predictions, though, this will probably turn out 100% wrong. I can see it happening, though. The storage space is already there. All that's missing is an interface that is as fast as this would need to be. Perhaps the entire backplate could be a hardware interface...
I'm a Java developer for an enterprise-level J2EE shop. I happen to like Java: the rich libraries, the elegance that OO can bring, the cross platform support (we code in Windows, have Solaris and Linux for our staging environment, and deploy to Solaris.) I have no complaints about Java, and encourage its use.
Having said that, however, ultimately a decision like this shouldn't be made on techonological grounds. I haven't used .NET, and typically cringe at anything Microsoft, but for Festivus's sake if it makes business sense for you to use MS products, then do so.
Java will get the job done. I imagine that .NET will, as well. If this guy has currently on payroll people with experience in either one of these, then that's probably what he should go with.
I don't understand. So you're saying that through out the whole of America, it's not possible to use Bluetooth to connect to your phone, for anything? And it doesn't matter what carrier you choose or what phone model due to the carriers rigging the market?
Well, kinda. You *can* connect Bluetooth phones up, but you have to pay for the privelege to do so by going through the carrier's network first. Completely unnecessary and completely ridiculous. But with libertarians running things, it probably won't change any time soon.
This simply isn't true. You are a shortsighted and uninformed person with latent luddite tendencies. Please stop spreading FUD about computers.
Computers suck when it comes to teaching languages. Sorry, it's true. I happen to speak Japanese and Arabic, and I have *never* found a computer program that was worth a used butt cheek.
The best practice for language is sitting at a desk, reading, repeating to yourself, and writing the characters over and over and over - with your hand.
And before you label me a luddite as well, know that I'm a computer programmer with over 15 years of experience. I have no problem with technology, but computers do not help education nearly as much as they help business and entertainment.
In fact, studies have shown that computers in the classroom *decrease* the educational experience, something I find none to difficult to believe. Humans are the best teachers, not computers.
6) Most experts agree that this makes sense, they've agreed for a long long time (pre dot com days). The lobby against it has been from people who are more interested in their personal pocket books than the overall health of the financial system.
One more party is worth mentioning: free market fundamentalists. There are those who put this in the "regulation bad" bucket and discard it immediately as "increased bureaucracy". They wouldn't be worth worrying about except for the minor fact that they control the national fiscal agenda right now.
I simply would not accept that limitation from a carrier. It's an abuse of their service. Do the sensible thing and change you carrier to someone who doesn't cripple your phone and your computing experience.
That's the thing, though. You can't. In America, the providers have banded together on this one and locked-out such functionality. And with a free market fundamentalist for a president, for Americans this is unlikely to change via regulatory pressures from the communications commission.
Kudos to you for checking to make sure. Lord knows there are plenty of people who once they get an idea in their head won't bother to verify it later, and instead forever use it for fodder in the "My Favorite OS" religious wars.
You *still* can't update a system via ssh.
What are you talking about? That's been around since at least 2002. man softwareupdate and read up on it.
But none of them are happy about it. We were raised, I guess, with those "moral values" that everyone's talking about. And I don't recall cheating on that list, anywhere. No, I take that back. There was "Cheaters never prosper" and "If you cheat, you only cheat yourself" and "Better to die for the truth then live a lie."
I wish there were more Republicans like you, instead of Sean Hannity/Limbaugh/random GOP apologist. The "good" Republicans seem to have been almost entirely sidelined, while those in power (Bush, Delay) are corrupt and willing to commit any crime in order to advance their power.
The last good Republican president was Dwight Eisenhower, and he's the one who warned against the "military industrial complex" that seems to have since successfully taken over a large part of the national agenda.
D'you think it's because North Carolina was John Edwards' home state, mebbe
Except, of course, that the errors were in Bush's favor. That means it's a vicious Democratic conspiracy, natch.
Look man, I'm a Democrat because the GOP has become so jaw-droppingly criminal and almost cult-like. And don't give me any of that "they're all corrupt" BS, because when it comes to corruption, no one can hold a candle to the modern Republican party. Don't believe me? Do your own research. I did, and was as surprised as anyone at the outcome.
Yes, there are crooks on both sides of the aisle. No, it is not a 50/50 split.
When it comes to vote fraud, though, if the Democrats had any balls they'd be stringing up certain Republicans up by their scrawny fascist necks. Justice freakin' demands it.
Adding metadata to the file system just causes gratuitous incompatibilities; there is no real benefit. Be tried it, Microsoft tried it, and Apple is trying it as well. In fact, this idea goes way, way back. In part, UNIX was intended to clean up this kind of mess.
LOL. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You're funny, though.