Hard to believe such a racist comment is posted from an account with positive karma, but even harder to believe this has been upvoted. WTF??
Are you an American? That would explain your lack of sense of humour. It's called black humour and ironically your righteous indignation makes you sound racist to non-Americans. Get with this century already.
Umm.. that's not what black humor is. Black humor isn't about black people; it's about satirizing the morbid: suffering, pain, death, disease, violence, et al. a sort of self-deprecating look at humanity and our vulnerabilities.
The herd/fad/trend mindset. You've got the huge crowds that follow Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, etc.. Look at the yo-yo'ing that studies on coffee/caffeine do. I stopped listening to all these random flip flopping studies. Just common sense and moderation are pretty good guides to healthy living, too much of anything is bound to be bad.
Ah. Thanks. Well, considering we had a 32" CRT that my wife had on 16/7 before (goes on first thing in the morning, off last thing at night) this is probably still a power savings.
I'll try disabling it, I'm curious now to see how long it takes.
Maybe they've made some recent improvements, but I've never seen one I liked. Grainy or blocky picture. *shrug* What counts is if you're happy with it.
About.5 seconds or less. Seriously. I was pleasantly surprised. Instant On is an option in the settings that can be enabled/disabled, though I've not done any research into why anyone would want that disabled.
:-) I'm not using a wired connection currently, just wireless.. so I use the router's MAC filter, I don't broadcast my SSID, and it's of course encrypted. It's just as effective. None of my neighbors are stupid enough to run open wireless APs, otherwise I'd be concerned it might just join their network. Hmm. Now I have to see if I can just shut the wireless off completely, just in case.
Sadly, anymore,regarding "smart" vs regular, your choices get much narrower if you want a larger set, especially one that is 4K UltraHD. Everything is going "SmartTV". Eventually you'll have no choice. I just finally bought a new only TV 3 weeks ago, after using a CRT all these years (my wife is a freakin' luddite): a Samsung 50" UHD model. Just my luck.
Believe me, I was not hyped on the "smart" aspect (my BluRay player can already do all that anyway), but I was set on getting a Samsung, as I'm not really happy with the pictures I've seen from Vizios, and Sony was more expensive. A friend told me his LG did not last long, and the Samsung was on sale for the Superbowl. Their picture quality is really good, so I nabbed it. It acts like a normal TV, and powers on instantly, at least.
On the plus side, I don't use the voice control feature, in fact it can be shut it off in the system menu, which I had already done, but of course I don't know if that actually shuts the mic off entirely or just disables the commands feature.
In any case, it's easy enough for me to simply disconnect the TV from the Internet (I use a MAC filter), and just use my BluRay player for streaming.
Who said anything about condemning them? And I enjoy a lot of the raunchy stuff on TV, Family Guy would not have been possible in the '70s or even '80s. '70s television sucked big time.
I merely made the observation that things are not as conservative as they once were. It's not the '50s anymore.
I'm sure it was incoherent to you, my earlier point was as well. I have no problem with someone with a difference of opinion, but you were nothing but derisive, and backed up *none* of your "facts" with a valid source.
But I agree, there's no point in us taking this any further.
I'm the one who feels too strongly? You're the one that took four paragraphs in response to my three sentences, to expound on how obviously more enlightened and superior you are. I guess you schooled me.
Let me tell you, I'm so glad that your academic aptitude has allowed you to be so incredibly perceptive as to notice that "nobody gives a shit" about there being no white players on an NBA team. No shit. That was the fucking point, Sherlock. Do you need a gold star or something? Would that make you jump up and down and clap like a seal?
My whole point is how stupid it is for the politically correct to push people into fields that they don't care about, or nitpick about some perceived "imbalance", when it suits their personal agenda.
But you've outed yourself as someone with a childlike propensity to over-anxiously deliver social justice, and obvious the SJW tag hit a nerve.
If the shoe fits, wear it.
How many times did you just label me "ignorant" and my observations "nonsense" and suggest I need an "education", you obnoxious, insufferable twaddling self-righteous douchebag?
Oh, and regarding the NBA teams, you've outdone yourself. Congratulations, you're also a closet racist. Besides the fact that you completely missed the point, the fact that blacks were in fact banned from teams decades ago has fuck all to do with the team lineups of today. You're right on one count -no one cares. I certainly don't give a shit, I don't even like basketball. But your reasoning for why you think no one cares reveals your own ignorance and racism. If you truly believed in racial equality, then you'd want the pendulum to hang in the middle. Swinging it from one extreme end all the way to the opposite end is not equality, as there would still exist a disparity; and yet you believe that this is why it is the way it is, and why it should be.
Historical banning is not why NBA teams are mostly black (hello, Baseball ring a bell? they were banned from that too), it's because white people simply don't gravitate towards playing it as much. It's no big deal.
Back to our original subject, it's the same reason there are fewer women are in IT, they're not being discouraged from it, they just don't really find it that interesting as compared to males, and trying to force them into it, citing some kind of bias is at work, is stupid. This is the politically correct agenda I mentioned. I work in IT, my boss is female. She certainly wasn't discouraged from working in IT. And she's a good boss. But she chose to work in IT, she wasn't pushed into it because of some bullshit perceived injustice.
Go educate yourself before you start smugly handing down that tripe to others from your lofty pulpit. But don't rush, I think you'll need several years at least.
Maybe most girls simply aren't interested in programming or firefighting or plumbing, just like most boys aren't interested in being fashion designers or makeup artists. Why is there such an enormous effort to "convince" girls that programming is what they're supposed to do? If any group of kids needs so much cajoling to get into a certain career path, maybe they just don't want to do that!
Because politically correct agendas. That is all. Notice that no one gets all SJW about the lack of white players on pro basketball teams, or whine that there are "too many" women teaching elementary (K through 6th grade) school and not enough men.
How do you figure? That's a crock. Overall, the country has shifted more left, not right, over the last many decades, which has simply brought more people out from the Right to complain; so the right feels more extreme. If you're too young to remember what it was like in the '70s or '80s, you might have that mistaken impression that this is a more conservative country than it was before. It's not. And insane far left wingers match insane far right wingers. There are too many far wingers, period.
1) Government is larger than ever before. There are more social programs than ever before.
2) Politicians discuss/argue and vote over gay marriage, something even Democrats would not have touched with a 20 ft pole 20+ years ago. The fact that right wingers cite religious objections isn't anything new, and both parties would've balked at the notion.
3) Media: A really good way to get the pulse of the times. Have you even watched television, or listened to radio? What would've have been vehemently censored before is now commonplace, and no topic is off limits. There are dedicated channels for minorities and alternate lifestyles. Media is much more liberal than ever. (despite protestations from the likes of Dan Quayle)
Obamacare was rejected by the right because they were shut out of much of the process by a majority D 111th congress, the public option was dropped, and because it was rushed through; no one knew exactly what was in it's 10,000+ pages.
You're being overly semantic. "Pop" in that context is indeed a modern idiom, a shortening of "pops out", often used to describe an HDTV picture, where the factory sets the color and contrast extra high on TVs so the picture just "pops" on the store display floor. Sort of a 3D-ish effect, or extremely vivid.
Nooo... really? When did that come out?
That's why I often resort to Amazon. But since I have a Staples less than 2 miles from my house, it would be nice if they carried more than 2 brands of pen or whatever.. and I wouldn't have to wait for it.. and pay shipping as well. Same with Home Depot too, Lowes carries all the little odds and ends I can never find at a Home Depot.
Well, there goes the last decent brick'n'mortar office store, who had previously merged with Office Max. Staples only carries the most base of common office supplies, their inventory was never as diverse as Office Depot. Everytime I looked for something a little different , like Frixion pens, or the Pilot Plumix, when they first came out, there was no sign of them at Staples - "Yeah, we got that" ?? No, no you don't. But the other two always did. Now it's game over, and yet another monopoly has formed.
RIP Sherman Act.
So do subscribers. I'm paying Comcast nearly $100 a month for the privilege of watching material which comprises about 35% commercials, if not more. I gotta cut that cable.
Oh, well done. You managed to cover at least two common liberal bullet points in that argument, but 3 or more out of 5 is preferred:
1) Name calling - make sure to call someone an idiot or a moron, insults always give your point more credibility!
2) Fox News - even if it has FUCK ALL to do with the topic, this is mandatory, or points will be deducted!
However, you disappointingly failed at several other golden opportunities here:
3) The Koch brothers - always worth a mention to drive home the "evil" branding, relevance not necessary (ala Fox News)
4) A knock on a Bush, preferably W., but nowadays Jeb is a good target
5) A Hate label: your political enemy *must* always be clearly labeled at least one kind of hater of some kind, made into a 2D caricature; from any of the following:
* Racist
* Bigot
* Homophobe
* Islamophobe
* Warmongering / Facist
or in this case,
* Denier
although you didn't actually state as such, so on second thought, you get a "C+", though originally I was leaning towards a "B-".
Not justifying the massive spying, but simply addressing the core logic presented here: Even if something is not 100% effective, does not mean it's useless:
Why have cops? Crime still happens. Why have diagnostic medical tests, yet people still get diseases. May as well stop chemotherapy too, I still have about 5% of the original cancer cells left that the first four treatments didn't kill. Many plots have been thwarted, particularly lately, and except in cases where a previously unknown informant steps forward out of the blue, the information comes from their spies and monitoring.
I'm only saying the objection to the spying should be based on privacy and personal freedom, not it's effectiveness; that's a different argument. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L... http://www.theguardian.com/pol...
Now, you easily argue, tally up all those thwarted attacks, are they worth the cost to our liberties? Again, I'm not debating that. Clearly privacy is dead, between the data-mining corporations, and the governments.
We are product. We are potential suspects.
Slashdot Mirror
Hard to believe such a racist comment is posted from an account with positive karma, but even harder to believe this has been upvoted. WTF??
Are you an American? That would explain your lack of sense of humour. It's called black humour and ironically your righteous indignation makes you sound racist to non-Americans. Get with this century already.
Umm.. that's not what black humor is. Black humor isn't about black people; it's about satirizing the morbid: suffering, pain, death, disease, violence, et al. a sort of self-deprecating look at humanity and our vulnerabilities.
Sound like a lead-in to Minority Report.
The herd/fad/trend mindset. You've got the huge crowds that follow Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, etc.. Look at the yo-yo'ing that studies on coffee/caffeine do. I stopped listening to all these random flip flopping studies. Just common sense and moderation are pretty good guides to healthy living, too much of anything is bound to be bad.
Ah. Thanks. Well, considering we had a 32" CRT that my wife had on 16/7 before (goes on first thing in the morning, off last thing at night) this is probably still a power savings.
I'll try disabling it, I'm curious now to see how long it takes.
Maybe they've made some recent improvements, but I've never seen one I liked. Grainy or blocky picture. *shrug* What counts is if you're happy with it.
About .5 seconds or less. Seriously. I was pleasantly surprised. Instant On is an option in the settings that can be enabled/disabled, though I've not done any research into why anyone would want that disabled.
:-) I'm not using a wired connection currently, just wireless.. so I use the router's MAC filter, I don't broadcast my SSID, and it's of course encrypted. It's just as effective. None of my neighbors are stupid enough to run open wireless APs, otherwise I'd be concerned it might just join their network. Hmm. Now I have to see if I can just shut the wireless off completely, just in case.
Sadly, anymore,regarding "smart" vs regular, your choices get much narrower if you want a larger set, especially one that is 4K UltraHD. Everything is going "SmartTV". Eventually you'll have no choice. I just finally bought a new only TV 3 weeks ago, after using a CRT all these years (my wife is a freakin' luddite): a Samsung 50" UHD model. Just my luck.
Believe me, I was not hyped on the "smart" aspect (my BluRay player can already do all that anyway), but I was set on getting a Samsung, as I'm not really happy with the pictures I've seen from Vizios, and Sony was more expensive. A friend told me his LG did not last long, and the Samsung was on sale for the Superbowl. Their picture quality is really good, so I nabbed it. It acts like a normal TV, and powers on instantly, at least.
On the plus side, I don't use the voice control feature, in fact it can be shut it off in the system menu, which I had already done, but of course I don't know if that actually shuts the mic off entirely or just disables the commands feature.
In any case, it's easy enough for me to simply disconnect the TV from the Internet (I use a MAC filter), and just use my BluRay player for streaming.
Sony and Sharp are like day and night. Sony rules the video market for best picture quality, but I think Sharp is garbage, as is Hitachi (for video).
Or UltraEdit, but it's not free.
Who said anything about condemning them? And I enjoy a lot of the raunchy stuff on TV, Family Guy would not have been possible in the '70s or even '80s. '70s television sucked big time.
I merely made the observation that things are not as conservative as they once were. It's not the '50s anymore.
I'm sure it was incoherent to you, my earlier point was as well. I have no problem with someone with a difference of opinion, but you were nothing but derisive, and backed up *none* of your "facts" with a valid source.
But I agree, there's no point in us taking this any further.
I'm the one who feels too strongly? You're the one that took four paragraphs in response to my three sentences, to expound on how obviously more enlightened and superior you are. I guess you schooled me.
Let me tell you, I'm so glad that your academic aptitude has allowed you to be so incredibly perceptive as to notice that "nobody gives a shit" about there being no white players on an NBA team. No shit. That was the fucking point, Sherlock. Do you need a gold star or something? Would that make you jump up and down and clap like a seal?
My whole point is how stupid it is for the politically correct to push people into fields that they don't care about, or nitpick about some perceived "imbalance", when it suits their personal agenda.
But you've outed yourself as someone with a childlike propensity to over-anxiously deliver social justice, and obvious the SJW tag hit a nerve. If the shoe fits, wear it.
How many times did you just label me "ignorant" and my observations "nonsense" and suggest I need an "education", you obnoxious, insufferable twaddling self-righteous douchebag?
Oh, and regarding the NBA teams, you've outdone yourself. Congratulations, you're also a closet racist. Besides the fact that you completely missed the point, the fact that blacks were in fact banned from teams decades ago has fuck all to do with the team lineups of today. You're right on one count -no one cares. I certainly don't give a shit, I don't even like basketball. But your reasoning for why you think no one cares reveals your own ignorance and racism. If you truly believed in racial equality, then you'd want the pendulum to hang in the middle. Swinging it from one extreme end all the way to the opposite end is not equality, as there would still exist a disparity; and yet you believe that this is why it is the way it is, and why it should be.
Historical banning is not why NBA teams are mostly black (hello, Baseball ring a bell? they were banned from that too), it's because white people simply don't gravitate towards playing it as much. It's no big deal.
Back to our original subject, it's the same reason there are fewer women are in IT, they're not being discouraged from it, they just don't really find it that interesting as compared to males, and trying to force them into it, citing some kind of bias is at work, is stupid. This is the politically correct agenda I mentioned. I work in IT, my boss is female. She certainly wasn't discouraged from working in IT. And she's a good boss. But she chose to work in IT, she wasn't pushed into it because of some bullshit perceived injustice.
Go educate yourself before you start smugly handing down that tripe to others from your lofty pulpit. But don't rush, I think you'll need several years at least.
Maybe most girls simply aren't interested in programming or firefighting or plumbing, just like most boys aren't interested in being fashion designers or makeup artists. Why is there such an enormous effort to "convince" girls that programming is what they're supposed to do? If any group of kids needs so much cajoling to get into a certain career path, maybe they just don't want to do that!
Because politically correct agendas. That is all. Notice that no one gets all SJW about the lack of white players on pro basketball teams, or whine that there are "too many" women teaching elementary (K through 6th grade) school and not enough men.
How do you figure? That's a crock. Overall, the country has shifted more left, not right, over the last many decades, which has simply brought more people out from the Right to complain; so the right feels more extreme. If you're too young to remember what it was like in the '70s or '80s, you might have that mistaken impression that this is a more conservative country than it was before. It's not. And insane far left wingers match insane far right wingers. There are too many far wingers, period.
1) Government is larger than ever before. There are more social programs than ever before.
2) Politicians discuss/argue and vote over gay marriage, something even Democrats would not have touched with a 20 ft pole 20+ years ago. The fact that right wingers cite religious objections isn't anything new, and both parties would've balked at the notion.
3) Media: A really good way to get the pulse of the times. Have you even watched television, or listened to radio? What would've have been vehemently censored before is now commonplace, and no topic is off limits. There are dedicated channels for minorities and alternate lifestyles. Media is much more liberal than ever. (despite protestations from the likes of Dan Quayle)
Obamacare was rejected by the right because they were shut out of much of the process by a majority D 111th congress, the public option was dropped, and because it was rushed through; no one knew exactly what was in it's 10,000+ pages.
hon hon hon
You're being overly semantic. "Pop" in that context is indeed a modern idiom, a shortening of "pops out", often used to describe an HDTV picture, where the factory sets the color and contrast extra high on TVs so the picture just "pops" on the store display floor. Sort of a 3D-ish effect, or extremely vivid.
Especially if you encounter space bears! They're worse than moon bats.
Nooo... really? When did that come out?
That's why I often resort to Amazon. But since I have a Staples less than 2 miles from my house, it would be nice if they carried more than 2 brands of pen or whatever.. and I wouldn't have to wait for it.. and pay shipping as well. Same with Home Depot too, Lowes carries all the little odds and ends I can never find at a Home Depot.
Well, there goes the last decent brick'n'mortar office store, who had previously merged with Office Max. Staples only carries the most base of common office supplies, their inventory was never as diverse as Office Depot. Everytime I looked for something a little different , like Frixion pens, or the Pilot Plumix, when they first came out, there was no sign of them at Staples - "Yeah, we got that" ?? No, no you don't. But the other two always did. Now it's game over, and yet another monopoly has formed.
RIP Sherman Act.
So do subscribers. I'm paying Comcast nearly $100 a month for the privilege of watching material which comprises about 35% commercials, if not more. I gotta cut that cable.
That's why they listed it as an idiom.
It's a common enough idiom.
http://dictionary.reference.co...
verb (used with object), comprised, comprising.
1. to include or contain:
The Soviet Union comprised several socialist republics.
2. to consist of; be composed of:
The advisory board comprises six members.
3. to form or constitute:
Seminars and lectures comprised the day's activities.
Idioms:
4. be comprised of, to consist of; be composed of:
The sales network is comprised of independent outlets and chain stores.
Oh, well done. You managed to cover at least two common liberal bullet points in that argument, but 3 or more out of 5 is preferred: 1) Name calling - make sure to call someone an idiot or a moron, insults always give your point more credibility!
2) Fox News - even if it has FUCK ALL to do with the topic, this is mandatory, or points will be deducted!
However, you disappointingly failed at several other golden opportunities here:
3) The Koch brothers - always worth a mention to drive home the "evil" branding, relevance not necessary (ala Fox News)
4) A knock on a Bush, preferably W., but nowadays Jeb is a good target
5) A Hate label: your political enemy *must* always be clearly labeled at least one kind of hater of some kind, made into a 2D caricature; from any of the following:
* Racist
* Bigot
* Homophobe
* Islamophobe
* Warmongering / Facist
or in this case,
* Denier
although you didn't actually state as such, so on second thought, you get a "C+", though originally I was leaning towards a "B-".
But in 2023 they debunked that experiment, as I recall..
Not justifying the massive spying, but simply addressing the core logic presented here: Even if something is not 100% effective, does not mean it's useless:
Why have cops? Crime still happens. Why have diagnostic medical tests, yet people still get diseases. May as well stop chemotherapy too, I still have about 5% of the original cancer cells left that the first four treatments didn't kill. Many plots have been thwarted, particularly lately, and except in cases where a previously unknown informant steps forward out of the blue, the information comes from their spies and monitoring.
I'm only saying the objection to the spying should be based on privacy and personal freedom, not it's effectiveness; that's a different argument.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...
http://www.theguardian.com/pol...
Now, you easily argue, tally up all those thwarted attacks, are they worth the cost to our liberties? Again, I'm not debating that. Clearly privacy is dead, between the data-mining corporations, and the governments.
We are product. We are potential suspects.