I guess you never heard of the idea that government policies are all resting on something called a "slippery slope." The idea of momentum applies to government policy (war on drugs anyone?) just as much as it does to particles.
JFK was the man to guaranteed man on the moon by the end of the decade. In order to achieve this, NASA needed a blank check. JFK gave it to them.
As to the illegal war in Cambodia; wtf is a legal war? Someone will always claim it is illegal. Who is right? Or is this like history books, and the winner is right?
bears the name of the man who invented modern deficit spending in America.
That would be JFK, not Reagan. We can thank JFK for the mess that was the Vietnam conflict, as well as the mess that is NASA. Neither of those endeavors were cheap. What a great leader he was...
Reagan was pro-defense (USSR hadn't fallen yet) but not really pro-big-goverment. His anti-labor policies must have been why he had more Democrats voting for him than any Republican ever.
While I agree, I must ask you this: Are we judging our country by the standards set by other countries? I think it should be the other way around. Other countries should judge their greatness by our standard. However, I do agree that 2 political parties simply isn't enough.
What is so great right our country right now that we should be the bellweather of what is considered great? Nothing that I can see. America was not better in the past because it was America, it was better because of its ideals, and its actions. That is no longer the case. We have been reduced to rich bullies that play the role of police officer for the world.
The party I've chosen is both pro-choice and pro-gun... the Libertarian party.
As a registered Libertarian, can you vote in the most important elections? No. I am of course referring to local elections that affect school district budgets and other important matters.
If by that statement you're referring to the Supreme Court, I have to agree, but disagree with changing it. The Supreme Court is supposed to represent long-term values, so the popular trends don't get made into permanent law if they contradict the Constitution. That's why they have life-time appointments. If they started voting for whatever the public wants, or thinks they want, the Supreme Court would become just as corrupt as the rest of the government already is. The only difference is that since they're lifetime appointments, it takes longer for them to become corrupt... even though some people (I won't mention any names) are trying to do so anyway.
If you want to pick nits... most of the Amendments of the last 100 years have been due to popular public opinion. Just ask any woman or minority. These Amendments went straight against the original intent of the founding documents of this country. Women can't vote, blacks don't count as a person (only 3/5), abortion as usage of modern science, etc etc.
As to the time required for corruption; a split second. The first time a Justice dissents, and it is all over.
Education is a problem, but for a different reason I think. Up until 30 years ago, teaching was a highly respectable endeavor. Now it has been reduced to "those that can't, teach." Until teachers are treated as most honorable shapers of the future (which is what they are), the effort put into the system will continue to scale down. This effort is not just from the teachers, but the students as well. For a nice example of what I am referring to, go to Japan.
I also think that _all unions_ should be dismantled. What has the UAW done other than artificially increase the cost of American cars, with the obvious side effects. Teachers lose a good 10-15% of their wages so they can do the collective bargaining, to get a 5% pay increase. Hrmm... makes sense?
My basic fear is; this country is going straight into the shitter. People are willing to give up their basic civil liberties with just the mention of the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" or whatnot. They think that it only affects those that are being villainized by the government. They fail to see that everyone is being clustered into one group; possible suspect. Some non scientific (read online) polls I have seen show 70% or more approval of diminished civil liberties. "Give me liberty or give me death" means nothing now. We haven't had to fight anything locally (in the USA) for 3 or 4 decades now. I find it amazing that with the growing number of "minorities" in this country, people are putting up with this. One day, people are going to wake up and realize that there are more black (African-American or whatever is p.c.) and hispanic people than there are white people. Eventually our elected officials are going to mirror this. I fail to see how any self respecting black man can stand to see what is happening today in this country. If you are Arab looking, you are on a list. You will be pointed out by someone. You will be scrutinized where ever you go. This country supposedly is about that _not_ being the case. Now it is okay again. MLK Jr must be rolling over in his grave.
But I digress...
The political system of the USA can not stand much longer only representing 2 points of view. Countries the size of Texas (France for one) have 7 or even more major political parties. We have 2. That is not right (what party is for someone who is pro-choice and also pro gun?). And what it really comes down to is, he/she with the most money wins. Regardless of the endeavor. There have been a few glowing failures (Perot) to this, but not often.
And overseeing all of this is the same stodgy old Supreme Court full of dinosaurs from a bygone era. The Chief Justice has been on the court for ever (1968 or something). Clarence Thomas turned out to be a waste (rarelt speaks up about anything). I could go on.
This country we live in is dynamic, and most of the rulers are as well. At the top, we are being "represented" by something that does not resemble the current situation. That is depressing.
And I really think most people today are stuck in the same old rut that screwed over people throughout history; complacency and the status quo.
I think the terms should be limited to something like 7 years. This way you can not have anyone there for 2 full presidential terms.
There are currently 9 members (1 Chief and 8 Associate Justices).
I guess it is more practical to have terms of 9 years (1 new SCJ per year). Make the Chief Justice position open only to current SCJ's with 5 years of bench time or more, no more than 7 years.
Every other judge in the country (AFAIK) has a term. Some are elected by the public, other by their peers. There is nothing in place to hold the Supreme Court Justices in check. They can do whatever, whenever, for as long as they shall live. They have more power than anyone else in the country; due to the fact that they can outlast any of their detractors. All they end up doing is voting party lines 90% of the time anyhow. Since when does politics govern law (in theory)? Law is supposed to be about something other than religious doctrine and party platforms.
The executive branch should not be involved (as they are currently) in determining whom the Justices are. The SC is overseeing that exec branch is doing a proper job, but they are put in place by the exec branch...
I think we are both in agreeance (from opposite sides of the fence) that the American legal system, and its laws, are in shambles. Not much of it makes sense, and most of it contradicts something else.
Not much can change though until the Supreme Court is no longer a lifetime appointment.
Public health is bullsh*&? (btw, "bullsh*&"? please tell me that was an intended censorship joke) Best I can tell, most of the public is pretty concerned with their health. By your logic we shouldn't have laws banning spaying machine gun fire in public - Go somewhere else if you think the bullets are dangerous.
Machine guns are illegal too...
Most of the general public is NOT concerned about their health (looka the obesity numbers, or smoking numbers, of US citizens).
My ire is due to the fact that cigs are legal to make, sell, use, and tax. But now it is illegal to use them in public in NYC (and CA too IIRC). If they are so bad, why are they still legal? Give me a good reason, other than taxes.
Drinking age is a a stupid law. When I was 12 I had access to beer and hard liquor. Guess what? I tried it. Tried smoking too. Who cares? Am I worse off because of it? No.
Federal highway money is a nice way of saying "extortion in this case is good." Same goes for the 75mph speed limit stuff (Anything over 65 or 70... not sure which, causes loss of percentage of fed hwy funds).
Most of this would not be a problem, if people stopped being friends to their kids, and actaully being parents. But I digress.
"I believe in freedom of speech as long as I am not offended by what you say" - direct quote of my old literature professor (Univ. AZ 1993).
Censorship is a hard word to throw around. What is the difference between child porn and regular porn? Age is just a arbitrary number, 18 by no means implies rational intelligent thought (nor does 21 for that matter).
NYC is now completely non-smoking in all public places. Why? Public health is bull sh*&. Go somewhere else if you think it is unhealthy. You swim in a clean pool / river / lake instead of a polluted one for the same reason.
18 to vote. 18 to join the military. 21 to buy or consume alcohol legally in the USA. Old analogy, I know. But it still works.
Wal-Mart won't sell DVD's or CD's that it deems inappropriate. Walk into any store, and it is obvious that their policy is rather inconsistent.
How are the governments (regardless of USA or Thailand or China etc etc) choices going to be any different. Will it be something that is under public oversight. Whose jurisdiction is it exactly?
Consider Premiere's sales numbers before Final Cut. By Adobe's own admission, Mac users had 30% of sales. Those sales vanished because people love Final Cut. But a 30% market share for software purchases, coming from a platform that only has 3% of sales, is pretty impressive, no?
I read that to mean before FCP 30% of Adobe Premiere's sales were Mac, and 70% Windows. Now it is something like 15% or less.
I assume that at least some of the FCP loyalty is based in loyalty to Apple the company, not just FCP the program...
The decision reflects Apple's success in the digital video market with Final Cut Pro. "Around 80-90 per cent of our Premiere customers are on Windows," Kilisky said. "There was around a 70 per cent Windows, 30 per cent Mac split before Final Cut Pro."
"Final Cut Pro cut the business in half," he added. "It's unfortunate for those left behind - we'll be happy to upgrade them to the Windows version," he said.
As to profitability, as Apple's market share keeps slipping (now down around 3%) there are going to be less and less closed source, commercial grade, productivity programs / suites. I presume we will see Apple using, and offering, much more open source software.
FCP took about 1/2 of the business from Adobe (Mac market). More than 90% of the market for Adobe's video stuff now runs on Windows. What is the point of wasting money on something that many Mac faithful won't use, simply because Apple offers something of their own? Lets just hope that Adobe doesn't decide to drop some other high profile Mac products (PS for one), of that the next version of FCP goes up in price 50%.
I haven't used 7.02 or any other Netscape since 6.x series. Usually I just stick with IE (bank stuff) or Mozilla when I am on the Windows machine at work. At home (linux), I have not used anything besides Mozilla for 2 years or so. Konqueror once in a blue moon, mainly to compare weird things from Safari (ex g/f iBook) to Konq.
Way back in the day, I used only Netscape. Occasionally I get nostalgic and try it again. Lately (4.x 6.x and now 7.1) I have been very under-whelmed:(
Using Netscape 7.1 for Windows (I am at work, ok?) I still can't vote in a poll properly (pop-up appears, but the vote data is loaded in main window, leaving pop-up blank).
Unrequested pop-ups are not being blocked.
I guess this is going into the "Recycle Bin" in the next minute or two...
For CT, if you are on the state list, you do not need to do anything (I had to check for myself already). You will be on the national list by default.
Connecticut will adopt the National Do Not Call Registry in place of its existing state do not call list and share the numbers on its state list with the national registry. Connecticut consumers who already signed up for the state list do not need to re-register to have the protections of both federal and state law.
WiFi is not unmetered as the/. editor presumes either. Someone pays for the bandwidth at some point. It is just more difficult to bill to a user of a wifi hotspot, other than the model of $3/hr or whatever McDonald's (not a joke) wants to charge for access after the free trial is over.
Slashdot Mirror
By "your" do you imply the US Governments official stand, to be upheld in a court of law? Up to and including the US Supreme Court?
I guess you never heard of the idea that government policies are all resting on something called a "slippery slope." The idea of momentum applies to government policy (war on drugs anyone?) just as much as it does to particles.
JFK was the man to guaranteed man on the moon by the end of the decade. In order to achieve this, NASA needed a blank check. JFK gave it to them.
As to the illegal war in Cambodia; wtf is a legal war? Someone will always claim it is illegal. Who is right? Or is this like history books, and the winner is right?
bears the name of the man who invented modern deficit spending in America.
That would be JFK, not Reagan. We can thank JFK for the mess that was the Vietnam conflict, as well as the mess that is NASA. Neither of those endeavors were cheap. What a great leader he was...
Reagan was pro-defense (USSR hadn't fallen yet) but not really pro-big-goverment. His anti-labor policies must have been why he had more Democrats voting for him than any Republican ever.
1. Think
2. Post
3. ???
4. Profit!!!
While I agree, I must ask you this: Are we judging our country by the standards set by other countries? I think it should be the other way around. Other countries should judge their greatness by our standard. However, I do agree that 2 political parties simply isn't enough.
What is so great right our country right now that we should be the bellweather of what is considered great? Nothing that I can see. America was not better in the past because it was America, it was better because of its ideals, and its actions. That is no longer the case. We have been reduced to rich bullies that play the role of police officer for the world.
The party I've chosen is both pro-choice and pro-gun... the Libertarian party.
As a registered Libertarian, can you vote in the most important elections? No. I am of course referring to local elections that affect school district budgets and other important matters.
If by that statement you're referring to the Supreme Court, I have to agree, but disagree with changing it. The Supreme Court is supposed to represent long-term values, so the popular trends don't get made into permanent law if they contradict the Constitution. That's why they have life-time appointments. If they started voting for whatever the public wants, or thinks they want, the Supreme Court would become just as corrupt as the rest of the government already is. The only difference is that since they're lifetime appointments, it takes longer for them to become corrupt... even though some people (I won't mention any names) are trying to do so anyway.
If you want to pick nits... most of the Amendments of the last 100 years have been due to popular public opinion. Just ask any woman or minority. These Amendments went straight against the original intent of the founding documents of this country. Women can't vote, blacks don't count as a person (only 3/5), abortion as usage of modern science, etc etc.
As to the time required for corruption; a split second. The first time a Justice dissents, and it is all over.
Education is a problem, but for a different reason I think. Up until 30 years ago, teaching was a highly respectable endeavor. Now it has been reduced to "those that can't, teach." Until teachers are treated as most honorable shapers of the future (which is what they are), the effort put into the system will continue to scale down. This effort is not just from the teachers, but the students as well. For a nice example of what I am referring to, go to Japan.
I also think that _all unions_ should be dismantled. What has the UAW done other than artificially increase the cost of American cars, with the obvious side effects. Teachers lose a good 10-15% of their wages so they can do the collective bargaining, to get a 5% pay increase. Hrmm... makes sense?
I understand what you are getting at.
My basic fear is; this country is going straight into the shitter. People are willing to give up their basic civil liberties with just the mention of the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" or whatnot. They think that it only affects those that are being villainized by the government. They fail to see that everyone is being clustered into one group; possible suspect. Some non scientific (read online) polls I have seen show 70% or more approval of diminished civil liberties. "Give me liberty or give me death" means nothing now. We haven't had to fight anything locally (in the USA) for 3 or 4 decades now. I find it amazing that with the growing number of "minorities" in this country, people are putting up with this. One day, people are going to wake up and realize that there are more black (African-American or whatever is p.c.) and hispanic people than there are white people. Eventually our elected officials are going to mirror this. I fail to see how any self respecting black man can stand to see what is happening today in this country. If you are Arab looking, you are on a list. You will be pointed out by someone. You will be scrutinized where ever you go. This country supposedly is about that _not_ being the case. Now it is okay again. MLK Jr must be rolling over in his grave.
But I digress...
The political system of the USA can not stand much longer only representing 2 points of view. Countries the size of Texas (France for one) have 7 or even more major political parties. We have 2. That is not right (what party is for someone who is pro-choice and also pro gun?). And what it really comes down to is, he/she with the most money wins. Regardless of the endeavor. There have been a few glowing failures (Perot) to this, but not often.
And overseeing all of this is the same stodgy old Supreme Court full of dinosaurs from a bygone era. The Chief Justice has been on the court for ever (1968 or something). Clarence Thomas turned out to be a waste (rarelt speaks up about anything). I could go on.
This country we live in is dynamic, and most of the rulers are as well. At the top, we are being "represented" by something that does not resemble the current situation. That is depressing.
And I really think most people today are stuck in the same old rut that screwed over people throughout history; complacency and the status quo.
*sigh*
I think the terms should be limited to something like 7 years. This way you can not have anyone there for 2 full presidential terms.
There are currently 9 members (1 Chief and 8 Associate Justices).
I guess it is more practical to have terms of 9 years (1 new SCJ per year). Make the Chief Justice position open only to current SCJ's with 5 years of bench time or more, no more than 7 years.
I am on the "big government sucks" side...
Every other judge in the country (AFAIK) has a term. Some are elected by the public, other by their peers. There is nothing in place to hold the Supreme Court Justices in check. They can do whatever, whenever, for as long as they shall live. They have more power than anyone else in the country; due to the fact that they can outlast any of their detractors. All they end up doing is voting party lines 90% of the time anyhow. Since when does politics govern law (in theory)? Law is supposed to be about something other than religious doctrine and party platforms.
The executive branch should not be involved (as they are currently) in determining whom the Justices are. The SC is overseeing that exec branch is doing a proper job, but they are put in place by the exec branch...
*sigh*
I hate this country sometimes...
I think we are both in agreeance (from opposite sides of the fence) that the American legal system, and its laws, are in shambles. Not much of it makes sense, and most of it contradicts something else.
Not much can change though until the Supreme Court is no longer a lifetime appointment.
Public health is bullsh*&? (btw, "bullsh*&"? please tell me that was an intended censorship joke) Best I can tell, most of the public is pretty concerned with their health. By your logic we shouldn't have laws banning spaying machine gun fire in public - Go somewhere else if you think the bullets are dangerous.
Machine guns are illegal too...
Most of the general public is NOT concerned about their health (looka the obesity numbers, or smoking numbers, of US citizens).
My ire is due to the fact that cigs are legal to make, sell, use, and tax. But now it is illegal to use them in public in NYC (and CA too IIRC). If they are so bad, why are they still legal? Give me a good reason, other than taxes.
Drinking age is a a stupid law. When I was 12 I had access to beer and hard liquor. Guess what? I tried it. Tried smoking too. Who cares? Am I worse off because of it? No.
Federal highway money is a nice way of saying "extortion in this case is good." Same goes for the 75mph speed limit stuff (Anything over 65 or 70... not sure which, causes loss of percentage of fed hwy funds).
Most of this would not be a problem, if people stopped being friends to their kids, and actaully being parents. But I digress.
"I believe in freedom of speech as long as I am not offended by what you say" - direct quote of my old literature professor (Univ. AZ 1993).
Censorship is a hard word to throw around. What is the difference between child porn and regular porn? Age is just a arbitrary number, 18 by no means implies rational intelligent thought (nor does 21 for that matter).
NYC is now completely non-smoking in all public places. Why? Public health is bull sh*&. Go somewhere else if you think it is unhealthy. You swim in a clean pool / river / lake instead of a polluted one for the same reason.
18 to vote. 18 to join the military. 21 to buy or consume alcohol legally in the USA. Old analogy, I know. But it still works.
Wal-Mart won't sell DVD's or CD's that it deems inappropriate. Walk into any store, and it is obvious that their policy is rather inconsistent.
How are the governments (regardless of USA or Thailand or China etc etc) choices going to be any different. Will it be something that is under public oversight. Whose jurisdiction is it exactly?
I did not realize that there was still such a disparity. Thank you for the info.
I read that to mean before FCP 30% of Adobe Premiere's sales were Mac, and 70% Windows. Now it is something like 15% or less.
I assume that at least some of the FCP loyalty is based in loyalty to Apple the company, not just FCP the program...
Found here.
As to profitability, as Apple's market share keeps slipping (now down around 3%) there are going to be less and less closed source, commercial grade, productivity programs / suites. I presume we will see Apple using, and offering, much more open source software.
FCP took about 1/2 of the business from Adobe (Mac market). More than 90% of the market for Adobe's video stuff now runs on Windows. What is the point of wasting money on something that many Mac faithful won't use, simply because Apple offers something of their own? Lets just hope that Adobe doesn't decide to drop some other high profile Mac products (PS for one), of that the next version of FCP goes up in price 50%.
Just like last time...
1965
Available for sale starting July 7th 2003.
Ah yes, but everyone wants to pay OOo prices don't they ;-)
/. posters; "Joe Sixpack just wouldn't understand."
Most equate open aource to being free of charge. To quote other
assuming it is in a relatively dust free environment.
or you could do the dremel thing... but i would use a smaller fan (maybe chipset fan instead of a case fan).
I haven't used 7.02 or any other Netscape since 6.x series. Usually I just stick with IE (bank stuff) or Mozilla when I am on the Windows machine at work. At home (linux), I have not used anything besides Mozilla for 2 years or so. Konqueror once in a blue moon, mainly to compare weird things from Safari (ex g/f iBook) to Konq.
:(
Way back in the day, I used only Netscape. Occasionally I get nostalgic and try it again. Lately (4.x 6.x and now 7.1) I have been very under-whelmed
Time marches on I suppose.
Please read my post.
NETSCAPE 7.1
This is a Netscape thread, not a Mozilla thread. There is a difference.
Nope.
.94 days (ish). I am used to the interface.
I have been using Mozilla since the
www.cnn.com
Using Netscape 7.1 for Windows (I am at work, ok?) I still can't vote in a poll properly (pop-up appears, but the vote data is loaded in main window, leaving pop-up blank).
Unrequested pop-ups are not being blocked.
I guess this is going into the "Recycle Bin" in the next minute or two...
Exactly.
/. editor presumes either. Someone pays for the bandwidth at some point. It is just more difficult to bill to a user of a wifi hotspot, other than the model of $3/hr or whatever McDonald's (not a joke) wants to charge for access after the free trial is over.
WiFi is not unmetered as the
As the article mentions, you can use apt for free.
No, I don't use Lindows.