Oh, I agree on the religion thing. I read last year that some Hindus killed a women for being a "witch", which really surprised me. It's just that no religion should be called, "the religion of peace", and lately, Islam "wins" for having the most extremists worldwide with the most financing and organization.
It really isn't a problem we created, per se. We enabled and exacerbated the problem, but what created the problem is the extremist ideology itself, Wahhabism and Salafism. We were a catalyst, but if not for us, it likely it would have found another outlet eventually. People like to beleive Islam was always peaceful up until the last 20 years, and except during the Crusades, but there have always been wars, conquests and infighting in it's history.
ISIS is not my top fear, but at least let 9/11 should have taught us a lesson: to not be so smug and complacent again. Who thought Al Qaeda was any kind of serious threat to the US homeland before then either? Turns out it's really fairly easy to kill a lot of people, you don't need a lot of expensive, hard to get military ordnance to do it, just a sick but creative mind and some patience.
ISIS is not just staying put in the Levant region, they're already spreading to parts of Africa and elsewhere, and eventually they will have cells over here if they don't already. Sure, they won't ever have a large mass of fighters over here, but as we've seen, a few twisted bastards can do a lot of damage. And what bothers people more than say, choking deaths or auto accidents, is that these kooks actually want to kill infidels, and they're putting a lot of effort behind it.
This. Authoritarian and Libertarian are on a whole different axis than Left Wing or Right Wing. You can be either R or L and be Authoritarian, or quite the opposite. You can plot anywhere on a 2 dimensional graph, it's not always along a one dimensional line.
Assuming you're sincere, there's a few reasons.
While with the newer generation of Androids this might not hold true, but I bought an iPhone 5 some years back because:
1. The iPhone5 camera is far superior to an S4 or previous. No contest.
2. The phone is simply responsive and reliable. No hangs or freezes. It's quick. Neither my Nexic 7 nor S1 could make that claim. It's there when I need it, since it is above all else, a phone. My old S1 wigged out too much to be trusted. Good thing my car never broke down when that was my phone. (Granted, that's a long time ago) I have an S4 now for work, and it's better in that regard, but still flaky, IMO.
3. I bought an iPhone so as to familiarize myself with at least one Apple product, just to broaden my technical scope
4. Some apps are only available for IOS.
5. Simple, solid interface.
iPhone Downsides:
1. No SD card slot.. still.
2. Ridiculous price difference in upgrading from 16GB to 32 or 64. Heck, 32GB isn't even available anymore, and that's the sweet spot!
3. No easily replaceable battery.. (I just did it last month, it was a minor nightmare) But even the Samsungs are doing that now, so that's a wash.
I'm due for a new phone though, and I'm still considering an iPhone6. I'm not that crazy about Samsung's UI, and never looked that deep at an HTC, LG, or Droid.
I might switch though, as I'm not a fanboi or hater of either product.
If it was possible, then it would have happened, and it hasn't.
1. We could be the first.
This is exactly what the first few, original advanced civilizations would've thought.
Maybe it takes longer for species to evolve to the point we're at now. After all, we know the heavier, necessary-for-life elements come from the novas of first generation stars, so that can eat up anywhere from 10 million to few billion years of wait time, plus the time waiting for the big bang to settle, galaxies to form, planets to acrete, etc..
That would decimate the economy in almost every major country as major cities are flooded and disheveled. That would be a bit more than a minor inconvenience to rich beach property owners. A 200 or 300 ft rise is also not gonna happen anytime soon, fortunately.
I wondered if they could just use her fingerprint without her even being present.
Good thing iPhones aren't up to using retinal scanners yet. Then again, an eye for an eye, I guess...
No, we have a hybrid system, which provide checks and balances, which is why it works as well as it does. It certainly needs a fine tuning though.
Either extreme is bad. Pure socialism results in, well, what we've seen in the past: mediocrity, authoritarianism and gov't oversight.
There are also severe flaws in pure capitalism (and here I don't differentiate from so-called "Corporatism"): we had more or less pure capitalism in the early days of the US: We saw huge mergers, the birth of monopolies and major corporations (JP Morgan, Carnegie, Roosevelt steel) who could manipulate the government easily; we had mere children working hard labor, many workers doing 14 hour or longer work days, no worker protections, no "benefits", and on many projects like building skyscrapers or mining, very unsafe working conditions.
The Sherman Anti-Trust act abated the threat of monopolies, while other "socialist" regulations gave workers rights and helped establish the middle class by restoring a balance. That's why a hybrid of both systems work best.
Do I sound like a Sanders supporter now? I'm not. I think he wants to tip the scales socialist a bit too much. However, something needs to be done to bring the "corporatism" into check, while ensuring that people are motivated to work and not just give up and become leeches to the system.
That's an odd claim since Firefox came before. Also, FF maintains its own certificate store whereas Chrome uses IE's. Useful for troubleshooting cert issues.
That's a strange claim, since Firefox was around first. Also Firefox maintains it's own certificate store, while Chrome uses IE's. This can be useful for troubleshooting cert issues.
Exactly what I was going to say. They'll run with this even though most elements and compounds involved in homeopathy aren't crystalline in nature like Beryllium.
You know that ads are protected by the first amendment too. Following your logic any kind of ad blocking should be illegal..
Logic? Blocking ads from displaying in *my* browser doesn't stop the advertiser (or host/developer) from placing their ads on the website/webpage. They're still there on the webpage for anyone else to see . It just means that *I* don't have to see it or listen to them; Free speech means you're allowed to say it, but it doesn't guarantee that I must listen to it.
It's fair so long as I'm not preventing anyone else from being exposed to it; restraining speech would be if I hacked the web server and actually removed the ads from the source code.
I don't think anyone said anything about constructing a new building, but I don't think it's unlikely or unreasonable that some small businesses also own their own existing buildings. A lot of them use the second floor as their home, the first floor as the business.
How will small businesses that are just making ends meet cope with this mandate? Are they (SFBS) granting subsidies of any kind?
I also think it's strange that buildings over 10 floors are exempt. They'd seem to be the most ideal candidates.
firstly, democracy has nothing to do with speech - the constitution does
secondly free speech explicitly exists to give the freedom of criticism, if people didn't support the criticism it would have no legs. Just because you think something is dumb or irritates you it doesn't mean it is "undemocratic"
Beside the fact that you're being rather pedantic here, you've utterly missed what I'm saying is "undemocratic". And I suspect you know it. What irritates me is that
A) Leftists aren't just criticizing the opposition, as they are free to do, now they're trying to actually shut it down and silence it - that is, free speech that they don't agree with. Shouting people down in protests, blocking the streets, labeling as "hate speech" anything they don't like. Not cool.
B) Hypocrisy: There's a high level of hypocrisy in all the name calling and insulting they regularly deliver, as I illustrated upthread. Hey, It's hilarious to call Chris Christie a stupid fat whale of a lard-ass, isn't it? Or to compare W. Bush to a chimp, or the thinly veiled "lipstick on a pig" comment for Palin. Hah, all in good fun, right? Well, that's free speech, yes. But if a republican or libertarian makes the same kind of off color remark, why that's politically incorrect! It's denounced as "hate speech" and there's a huge push to have it stopped and shut down.
What I can't get my head around is this: according to the summary, they spotted the gamma ray burst, which they claim occurred half a second after the first gravitational wave was detected. So.. is this suggesting that the gravitational wave exceeded the speed of light? But then, the gravitational wave is traveling slow enough that it takes a comparatively sluggish 7 msec to go from Louisana to DC? Maybe it's just the way the summary is written.
Depends, utterly. If it's more than a sentence or two, I'll type it or copy and paste; if it's just a password or something small, and especially if something I need to carry from one location to another, I'll just write it out on a post-it or something, then destroy the paper. Larger things like a paragraph from a tech article, I'll email or make an.rtf.
How were they going to save themselves? Clearly the humans had superior fire power the Na'vi were not prepared to deal with. The Tree was destroyed, and Na'vi morale at that point was crushed. The thing that gave Tully his edge (knock off the racist crap already) is that he was an inside man and knew the Human's vulnerabilities. He too would have died in the movie - twice- if not for Neytiri.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh, I agree on the religion thing. I read last year that some Hindus killed a women for being a "witch", which really surprised me. It's just that no religion should be called, "the religion of peace", and lately, Islam "wins" for having the most extremists worldwide with the most financing and organization.
It really isn't a problem we created, per se. We enabled and exacerbated the problem, but what created the problem is the extremist ideology itself, Wahhabism and Salafism. We were a catalyst, but if not for us, it likely it would have found another outlet eventually. People like to beleive Islam was always peaceful up until the last 20 years, and except during the Crusades, but there have always been wars, conquests and infighting in it's history.
Right, just republicans. Democrats aren't worried at all and you never see this kind of thing on CNN, ABC, or MSNBC. Oh wait, you do!
I can't wait for the War On Chicken Sandwiches
Close enough? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...
ISIS is not my top fear, but at least let 9/11 should have taught us a lesson: to not be so smug and complacent again. Who thought Al Qaeda was any kind of serious threat to the US homeland before then either? Turns out it's really fairly easy to kill a lot of people, you don't need a lot of expensive, hard to get military ordnance to do it, just a sick but creative mind and some patience.
ISIS is not just staying put in the Levant region, they're already spreading to parts of Africa and elsewhere, and eventually they will have cells over here if they don't already. Sure, they won't ever have a large mass of fighters over here, but as we've seen, a few twisted bastards can do a lot of damage. And what bothers people more than say, choking deaths or auto accidents, is that these kooks actually want to kill infidels, and they're putting a lot of effort behind it.
This. Authoritarian and Libertarian are on a whole different axis than Left Wing or Right Wing. You can be either R or L and be Authoritarian, or quite the opposite. You can plot anywhere on a 2 dimensional graph, it's not always along a one dimensional line.
Assuming you're sincere, there's a few reasons.
.. still.
While with the newer generation of Androids this might not hold true, but I bought an iPhone 5 some years back because:
1. The iPhone5 camera is far superior to an S4 or previous. No contest.
2. The phone is simply responsive and reliable. No hangs or freezes. It's quick. Neither my Nexic 7 nor S1 could make that claim. It's there when I need it, since it is above all else, a phone. My old S1 wigged out too much to be trusted. Good thing my car never broke down when that was my phone. (Granted, that's a long time ago) I have an S4 now for work, and it's better in that regard, but still flaky, IMO.
3. I bought an iPhone so as to familiarize myself with at least one Apple product, just to broaden my technical scope
4. Some apps are only available for IOS.
5. Simple, solid interface.
iPhone Downsides:
1. No SD card slot
2. Ridiculous price difference in upgrading from 16GB to 32 or 64. Heck, 32GB isn't even available anymore, and that's the sweet spot!
3. No easily replaceable battery.. (I just did it last month, it was a minor nightmare) But even the Samsungs are doing that now, so that's a wash.
I'm due for a new phone though, and I'm still considering an iPhone6. I'm not that crazy about Samsung's UI, and never looked that deep at an HTC, LG, or Droid.
I might switch though, as I'm not a fanboi or hater of either product.
If it was possible, then it would have happened, and it hasn't.
1. We could be the first.
This is exactly what the first few, original advanced civilizations would've thought.
Maybe it takes longer for species to evolve to the point we're at now. After all, we know the heavier, necessary-for-life elements come from the novas of first generation stars, so that can eat up anywhere from 10 million to few billion years of wait time, plus the time waiting for the big bang to settle, galaxies to form, planets to acrete, etc..
That would decimate the economy in almost every major country as major cities are flooded and disheveled. That would be a bit more than a minor inconvenience to rich beach property owners. A 200 or 300 ft rise is also not gonna happen anytime soon, fortunately.
I wondered if they could just use her fingerprint without her even being present.
Good thing iPhones aren't up to using retinal scanners yet. Then again, an eye for an eye, I guess...
Who is "Doctor Ready" ?
No, we have a hybrid system, which provide checks and balances, which is why it works as well as it does. It certainly needs a fine tuning though.
Either extreme is bad. Pure socialism results in, well, what we've seen in the past: mediocrity, authoritarianism and gov't oversight.
There are also severe flaws in pure capitalism (and here I don't differentiate from so-called "Corporatism"): we had more or less pure capitalism in the early days of the US: We saw huge mergers, the birth of monopolies and major corporations (JP Morgan, Carnegie, Roosevelt steel) who could manipulate the government easily; we had mere children working hard labor, many workers doing 14 hour or longer work days, no worker protections, no "benefits", and on many projects like building skyscrapers or mining, very unsafe working conditions.
The Sherman Anti-Trust act abated the threat of monopolies, while other "socialist" regulations gave workers rights and helped establish the middle class by restoring a balance. That's why a hybrid of both systems work best.
Do I sound like a Sanders supporter now? I'm not. I think he wants to tip the scales socialist a bit too much. However, something needs to be done to bring the "corporatism" into check, while ensuring that people are motivated to work and not just give up and become leeches to the system.
That's an odd claim since Firefox came before. Also, FF maintains its own certificate store whereas Chrome uses IE's. Useful for troubleshooting cert issues.
That's a strange claim, since Firefox was around first. Also Firefox maintains it's own certificate store, while Chrome uses IE's. This can be useful for troubleshooting cert issues.
Exactly what I was going to say. They'll run with this even though most elements and compounds involved in homeopathy aren't crystalline in nature like Beryllium.
Ah. Point taken. That narrows it down considerably.
You know that ads are protected by the first amendment too. Following your logic any kind of ad blocking should be illegal. .
Logic? Blocking ads from displaying in *my* browser doesn't stop the advertiser (or host/developer) from placing their ads on the website/webpage. They're still there on the webpage for anyone else to see . It just means that *I* don't have to see it or listen to them; Free speech means you're allowed to say it, but it doesn't guarantee that I must listen to it.
It's fair so long as I'm not preventing anyone else from being exposed to it; restraining speech would be if I hacked the web server and actually removed the ads from the source code.
I don't think anyone said anything about constructing a new building, but I don't think it's unlikely or unreasonable that some small businesses also own their own existing buildings. A lot of them use the second floor as their home, the first floor as the business.
How will small businesses that are just making ends meet cope with this mandate? Are they (SFBS) granting subsidies of any kind?
I also think it's strange that buildings over 10 floors are exempt. They'd seem to be the most ideal candidates.
Attempting to silence people whose political views you disagree with is attempting to comply with election law?
firstly, democracy has nothing to do with speech - the constitution does secondly free speech explicitly exists to give the freedom of criticism, if people didn't support the criticism it would have no legs. Just because you think something is dumb or irritates you it doesn't mean it is "undemocratic"
Beside the fact that you're being rather pedantic here, you've utterly missed what I'm saying is "undemocratic". And I suspect you know it. What irritates me is that
A) Leftists aren't just criticizing the opposition, as they are free to do, now they're trying to actually shut it down and silence it - that is, free speech that they don't agree with. Shouting people down in protests, blocking the streets, labeling as "hate speech" anything they don't like. Not cool.
B) Hypocrisy: There's a high level of hypocrisy in all the name calling and insulting they regularly deliver, as I illustrated upthread. Hey, It's hilarious to call Chris Christie a stupid fat whale of a lard-ass, isn't it? Or to compare W. Bush to a chimp, or the thinly veiled "lipstick on a pig" comment for Palin. Hah, all in good fun, right? Well, that's free speech, yes. But if a republican or libertarian makes the same kind of off color remark, why that's politically incorrect! It's denounced as "hate speech" and there's a huge push to have it stopped and shut down.
I can breathe through my hands and feet. Which is torture, because foot odor.
What I can't get my head around is this: according to the summary, they spotted the gamma ray burst, which they claim occurred half a second after the first gravitational wave was detected. So.. is this suggesting that the gravitational wave exceeded the speed of light? But then, the gravitational wave is traveling slow enough that it takes a comparatively sluggish 7 msec to go from Louisana to DC? Maybe it's just the way the summary is written.
Depends, utterly. If it's more than a sentence or two, I'll type it or copy and paste; if it's just a password or something small, and especially if something I need to carry from one location to another, I'll just write it out on a post-it or something, then destroy the paper. Larger things like a paragraph from a tech article, I'll email or make an .rtf.
How were they going to save themselves? Clearly the humans had superior fire power the Na'vi were not prepared to deal with. The Tree was destroyed, and Na'vi morale at that point was crushed. The thing that gave Tully his edge (knock off the racist crap already) is that he was an inside man and knew the Human's vulnerabilities. He too would have died in the movie - twice- if not for Neytiri.