Has anybody wondered why they have been addicted to junkfood, and exactly why nothing is being done about it ?
And here I was, thinking that it was because junk food tasted so darn good. Unbuttered unsalted Green Beans vs. Cheetohs--I can hear those Cheetos calling me.
Employment is a two-way thing. You give your time, effort and experience and in return they pay you what you are worth. If you have to ask for a pay-rise then it's not very two-way, a company should be able to guage your worth and adjust accordingly.
Marriage is a two-way thing. Communication is a must. Then your wife wonders why you can't read her mind. Sheesh!
Face it: his boss just admitted that he or she has been paying him less than he's worth to the company. Is that the kind of culture where he should want to work?
Face it: he has admitted that he voluntarily worked for his boss for less than he was worth to the company. Is that the kind of employee you want to hire?
Yeah thats a brilliant idea. Purposefully crash someones HDD to "drive a point home". Suddenly I'm not wondering why your looking for work in your sig.
Isn't just pulling the disk out, fully intact, and putting in an empty one the same as a total hard disk failure? When you're done, put the right drive back in.
The analogy doesn't hold. Owning a sports car does not entitle you to drive over the speed limit, and it is no guarentee that your reflexes are as good as you say they are.
So are you saying my Windows box crashed because of the bandwidth, or my slow reflexes?
Most magazines farm that sort of thing out. You should try contacting LJ by email to make sure you get someone at the magazine. Let them know that their contractor is falling down on the job.
Have to say, someone from LJ posted on this thread, and I contacted him, and it's getting straightened out. Props to LJ, especially since this happened four years ago.
Remember everybody, if you like the article then please buy the magazine! The articles, while provided free of charge, do not magically appear.
If you want more great articles like this, support Linux Journal. I know the idea of paying for something might go against some people's sensibilities (information wants to be FREEEEEEE!!! and such), but remember that in real life people need to eat. Please don't let the fine people at Linux Journal starve. Buy a magazine.
Sorry, I'm peeved with them. I had subscribed for two years, but had to cancel mid-stream due to some financial constraints (yeah, it got tight). I never got a refund. I called up, and was told that I hadn't paid yet. I said I did, and referred back to my credit card statement, and the lady sneeringly told me, "no you haven't!" Boy, was I surprised at that! So I said to myself, "I am never dealing with LJ again." I took the thirty dollar loss, figuring it was worth avoiding dealing with LJ.
Not that I'm suggesting anyone _not_ buy it. I'm just saying, _I_ ain't buying.
H bombs are big and scary, supposedly the only thing we want them for is deterrant, and aren't they already big enough and scary enough for that purpose?
Someone in the Department of War wants to be able to do "surgical nuclear strikes".
Any law which purports to violate the constitution is simply a nullity, and contrary to your vague implications, this has held up very well over the centuries.
But if the State defies the constitution, then what do you do? Just about everything our Central State does violates the 10th amendment. The Constitution spells out pretty much the Central State's legit activities, but it is way out of bounds _on everything_. Just pick a topic, any topic. Of course, the States are sold out--they know the value of getting in line behind the Central State. Especially the Southern States.
And just to present one coherent argument, the so-called war on terrorism is unconstitutional. The constitution sets out the process for engaging in war. Congress has not declared war. Bush is letting the military dogs out, with the Congress's approval (but not declaration of war). That's plainly unconstitutional.
This is spot on. The only thing I would add is that this makes more clear than ever the need for a system which places hard and fast limits on what even an elected government can do.
The US has the Bill of Rights. The UK does not. People often fail to recognize what a huge difference this is.
However, our government sets the limits on what it can do--it is its own authority. In other words, it really sets no limits for itself. For those of you who remember, recall the congressional efforts to self-impose spending limits. They just cannot and will not. There are no limits to what our government will do, given that it can flummox the mindless government-educated masses.
The constitution is a dead letter, kept in a glass case and trotted out for July 4th celebrations. W. and Ashcroft and all their Congressional Toadies (that includes most Dems, too) are busy erecting the Police State.
The labour government has an enormous majority within the house of commons, not because it is good or popular but simply because it's the better of two, frankly awful, choices.
I am sure that reflects the general state of things in the UK, much as the Rebublicrat party reflects the state of things in the US. A huge mass of easily-manipulated uncaring couch potatoes content to get their "news" from the networks elects the government it deserves.
No what i'm saying is that if the gov't WANTED TO, they could use deadly force to accomplish their goals. Don't believe me? Look at WACO, look at Ruby Ridge, look at the Kent State Massacre. NO COMPANY can LEGALLY use deadly force to accomplish their goals.. ONLY GOVERNMENTS CAN!
One aspect of a government is that it is the organization that has a monopoly on violence in a geographical area. Which makes me wonder what that makes the US gov't--a world empire? We seem to acknowledge no more boundaries on our bombing.
The way I look at it, they're not really charging me for the modem. I pay the same as the modem-owners do (I'm ignoring the billing statement shenanigans which say I _am_ paying for the modem lease). And if AT & T wants to do that, why can't they? Discriminatory generosity?
It's sort of puzzling to me that in a nation with no significant external threats, the people are still frightened enough to give up their liberties in exchange for some "temporary safety."
There is no risk too small about which Americans will do their Chicken Little routine. It's our nature now. We are a nation of cowards.
Listen, all you liberty-lovers. The only way to secure your liberty is through force or threat of force. For example, secession was an acknowledged right of any state in the USA, until Lincoln _crushed_ that notion when somebody actually tried it. Unless you can enforce your actions through force, you are at the mercy of those who can.
We hear a lot about freedoms these days from our government, but it's mostly boilerplate to pacify us while we are transformed into something authoritarian. What central State is not expanding its own scope and power these days at the expense of "the people"?
Slashdot Mirror
Best quote: "Microsoft declined comment on how much of a threat it considers Mozilla, saying it cannot speak on rival products."
GNU/Linux is not a rival, then, right from the horse's as^H^Hmouth.
I wonder if the RIAA is behind all this...
And here I was, thinking that it was because junk food tasted so darn good. Unbuttered unsalted Green Beans vs. Cheetohs--I can hear those Cheetos calling me.
Marriage is a two-way thing. Communication is a must. Then your wife wonders why you can't read her mind. Sheesh!
Face it: he has admitted that he voluntarily worked for his boss for less than he was worth to the company. Is that the kind of employee you want to hire?
Managers answer in unison: Yes!
SimCity.
Isn't just pulling the disk out, fully intact, and putting in an empty one the same as a total hard disk failure? When you're done, put the right drive back in.
So are you saying my Windows box crashed because of the bandwidth, or my slow reflexes?
Aren't those 40 the lucky ones?
The rip-off is that the first hit wasn't free. Most dealers will at least give you that first hit for free.
Have to say, someone from LJ posted on this thread, and I contacted him, and it's getting straightened out. Props to LJ, especially since this happened four years ago.
Sorry, I'm peeved with them. I had subscribed for two years, but had to cancel mid-stream due to some financial constraints (yeah, it got tight). I never got a refund. I called up, and was told that I hadn't paid yet. I said I did, and referred back to my credit card statement, and the lady sneeringly told me, "no you haven't!" Boy, was I surprised at that! So I said to myself, "I am never dealing with LJ again." I took the thirty dollar loss, figuring it was worth avoiding dealing with LJ.
Not that I'm suggesting anyone _not_ buy it. I'm just saying, _I_ ain't buying.
Eh, you're right, I'm just pissed at FDR for wrecking the Republic.
Precedent don't mean squat. re: Dred Scott.
Someone in the Department of War wants to be able to do "surgical nuclear strikes".
Edmund Burke must be spinning in his grave.
But if the State defies the constitution, then what do you do? Just about everything our Central State does violates the 10th amendment. The Constitution spells out pretty much the Central State's legit activities, but it is way out of bounds _on everything_. Just pick a topic, any topic. Of course, the States are sold out--they know the value of getting in line behind the Central State. Especially the Southern States.
And just to present one coherent argument, the so-called war on terrorism is unconstitutional. The constitution sets out the process for engaging in war. Congress has not declared war. Bush is letting the military dogs out, with the Congress's approval (but not declaration of war). That's plainly unconstitutional.
However, our government sets the limits on what it can do--it is its own authority. In other words, it really sets no limits for itself. For those of you who remember, recall the congressional efforts to self-impose spending limits. They just cannot and will not. There are no limits to what our government will do, given that it can flummox the mindless government-educated masses.
The constitution is a dead letter, kept in a glass case and trotted out for July 4th celebrations. W. and Ashcroft and all their Congressional Toadies (that includes most Dems, too) are busy erecting the Police State.
I am sure that reflects the general state of things in the UK, much as the Rebublicrat party reflects the state of things in the US. A huge mass of easily-manipulated uncaring couch potatoes content to get their "news" from the networks elects the government it deserves.
Since when have the Brits been citizens? I thought they were all subjects.
One aspect of a government is that it is the organization that has a monopoly on violence in a geographical area. Which makes me wonder what that makes the US gov't--a world empire? We seem to acknowledge no more boundaries on our bombing.
Orwell was a prophetic genius. We live in dark days...
The way I look at it, they're not really charging me for the modem. I pay the same as the modem-owners do (I'm ignoring the billing statement shenanigans which say I _am_ paying for the modem lease). And if AT & T wants to do that, why can't they? Discriminatory generosity?
Hear hear! I say we all switch to being mindless zombies of /.
There is no risk too small about which Americans will do their Chicken Little routine. It's our nature now. We are a nation of cowards.
Listen, all you liberty-lovers. The only way to secure your liberty is through force or threat of force. For example, secession was an acknowledged right of any state in the USA, until Lincoln _crushed_ that notion when somebody actually tried it. Unless you can enforce your actions through force, you are at the mercy of those who can.
We hear a lot about freedoms these days from our government, but it's mostly boilerplate to pacify us while we are transformed into something authoritarian. What central State is not expanding its own scope and power these days at the expense of "the people"?