My experience is similar, in relation to the logic sections of the LSAT, a test I prepped for, but never took. The key to situations like this is that there may be more than 1 answer that is, technically, correct, but there is one answer that is most correct, or is the best possible answer. They put these kinds of questions on there to find out if you can not just find a right answer, but find the best answer. That's why they have those.
Well, at least that last one they proposed didn't take off. The previous hike on cig taxes was at least supposed to go to health programs, and stop smoking programs. The most recent one (the one that didn't make it), was just going to go into the general fund. It was a straight jack on smokers, 'cause they're degenerates and can't fight back...
So basically, in a nutshell, their lives are worth less, and if we want to invade them, we should just invade them because we can and we feel like it and it's somehow in our interests to do so? Do you work for Chevron or something?
If you want to talk about naivete, how naive do you have to be to think that this whole business with Iraq is about anything other than oil, and the lucrative contracts that the US oil companies missed out on. A 'regime change' is the perfect opportunity to nullify the contracts they made with the French and Russians, and cut ourselves in on the deal.
If you think that this escapade has anything to do with terrorism, human rights, weapons of mass destruction, Saddam's 'nukular' capability or anything other than big bucks for oil companies, who's being naive now?
If you think it's OK to spend US$200 billion and who knows how many people's lives to make Iraq safe again for oil exploration, then so be it, but don't try and make this out to be some kind of 'protecting American lives' thing, because that ain't what it's about.
He said they didn't serve drinks with bull semen, and he said through clenched teeth
I don't know what's funnier, the fact that he got all mad about it, or that he was dumb enough to believe there's any actual cow content in Red Bull...
Re:Can someone define "terrorist"?
on
That Link Is Illegal
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Oh boy. Which terrorists are you talking about? It can't be Al Queda, because Hussein's Baath party is totally secular, and Hussein has been pretty brutal in dealing with Islamic fundamentalists in Iraq (as in, there are very few left because most of them are dead.) Let's just say that there's no love lost between Hussein and those people.
If you're talking about Hamas or Hezbollah, or any of the other Palestinian groups, he supports the secular ones, but not the Islamic fundy ones. If that's the case, then most every predominantly Muslim country in the region should also be invaded.
I realize that the mainstream media doesn't seem to make these distinctions, and the administration would prefer if you just took their word for it, but if you scratch the surface, things aren't as black and white as they seem.
Then, you, as a conservative in the Rockefeller vein, need to take back your party from the people that GWB had to pander to by appointing Ashcroft, namely the so-called "Christians" who arrogantly assume that this country is for them and them only. These are the people that (wrongly) argue that the U.S. was originally intended to be a theocracy, that there's no constitutional basis for a seperation of church and state. They look at the Taliban and think "Great idea, but the wrong religion".
I'm not a member of any political party, I tend to vote either Democrat or Green, but I have, and probably will again, vote for a Republican if I think they can do the best job.
Your party has been hijacked by people who at best are a minor segment of the Republican party, but somehow, every Republican in office or running for office feels like he has to throw them a bone, failing to realize that by telling them to get stuffed, they might be able to pick up more votes than they would have if every single one of those "Christians" voted.
Next time Ashcroft visits your home town (I don't have to worry, because Ashcroft would never, ever set foot in the SF Bay Area...) I suggest you go to see him speak, and be sure to dress up like a calico cat. (Ashcroft apparently believes that they are agents of Satan. Yes, he is the Attorney General.)
Working long hours other than every once in a while, invariably leads to bad code with weird bugs and awful documentation. When I was a technical lead on many projects, I remember the feeling of dread that came over me when I would here the awful words: "We were here until 2am working on this!", as though they expected a medal or a prize. The whole time I'm thinking to myself:"Great. How many hours today am I going to have to spend fixing all the bugs you generated with your late-night jam session?".
Not every software development effort has to be this startup company all-day all-night and weekends adventure.
One company I worked for actually had a development manager that told people to leave the office.
The cool solution I found was to become a contractor, in my contract it explicitly states that I cannot work more than 40 hours a week without approval from the VP of Engineering. I'm lovin' that!
Re:Your rights won't be taken away
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
Your linkage is bad. Besides, the sentiment is true, and it does appear in the version of The Internationale that I have (there are different versions). Just because some filthy godless comyanist said it, doesn't make the statement any less true. The fact is, that rights are merely priviledges extended to a chosen few if they're not enjoyed by everyone. The point is that if Muslims in the US can't get together and practice their religion, socialize with members of their mosque without being suspected of plotting to blow up a building, then they are not enjoying their rights as guaranteed by the constitution, which makes those rights no longer rights.
It's important to understand that the Bill of Rights does not give rights, but seeks to make sure that the government does not trample on the rights that we have as human beings and citizens from birth. The constitution also does not claim that these inalienable rights are the exclusive province of those lucky enough to live in the US, but rights that everyone everywhere has.
Re:I dont feel any less free.
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
Emigrants have NEVER had the same rights as U.S citizens
Hey, Mr. Political Science, here's a lesson for ya:
An emigrant is someone who moves from Ohio to California, or from London to Brighton.
An immigrant is someone who moves from one country to another.
Re:Well, I guess that's how Fascism takes root....
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
He could have gone to trial, but obviously didn't like his chances.
Well, that argument goes both ways. He pled guilty to taking up arms against US forces, but the conspiracy to kill Americans, and treason stuff probably couldn't be made to stick, either. They certainly couldn't get any of that prison uprising stuff on him.
At any rate, I'm not convinced that the poor schmuck is guilty of anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Because we can't get Osama, guys like Lindh and Padilla are getting nailed.
I personally think that our intelligence people know exactly where OBL is, and they're waiting to nail him for a 2004 'October Surprise', in case they need it.
Re:IF THERE ARE FREE ELECTIONS IN 2004. IF NOT....
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
You don't suppose that it's a coincidence that as soon as the press started asking questions about dodgy accounting at Halliburton and Harken Energy, they turned up the volume on this Iraq business is it?
When you have a Bush in office, there is a 100% chance that there will be a war in the middle east.
Re:I'm sick of dumbshits saying GWB is great
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
The UN weapons inspectors were kicked out by your friend Saddam, and Saddam has publically stated that they're staying out.
This is one of those cases where if you repeat something often enough, it becomes commonly accepted as truth.
The UN inspectors were not "kicked out" by Hussein. They were, in fact, withdrawn by the UN when it became clear that Richard Butler, the guy who took over UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission on Munitions) from a Swedish guy whose name I forget, was furnishing the information gathered by the inspectors to the CIA in order to help the US military develop target packages for air strikes, in violation of UNSCOM's stated objectives.
UNSCOM was doing a fine job disarming Iraq until the US started co-opting the information, an interesting side-effect is that now the hawks are using this as justification for attacking Iraq. Funny how that works isn't it?
Double Bogus. Their stated objective is for the U.S. Military to give up its bases in the Holy Land, and for the U.S. to stop meddling in the affairs of (oil-producing) countries in the Middle East.
Re:Your rights won't be taken away
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
And as The Internationale says:
A right is merely priviledge extended unless enjoyed by all.
Re:We created this country...
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
This is interesting, because I see a lot of jobs out there that specifically ask for CS degrees. To my mind, a CS degree is not at all required to be a competent or even excellent Software Developer. My degree is in Sociology, which I'm sure some people scoff at, but for me it's been invaluable. What do you learn from Sociology? I'll tell you a couple of things that I take from Sociology that have helped me tremendously.
1. Developing Processes-- Sociologists learn to develop processes and methodologies for conducting research projects from scratch. Most (good) Sociology departments require students to develop and fine-tune their own research methodologies appropriate to the subject they wish to study. They give you the tools (statistical analysis, interview techniques), but you need to decide how you want to play it. I know you get these things in CS as well, but how many expect you to develop your own?
2. Big-Picture Views-- Sociologists are trained to look at societies, groups of people, etc. You begin to see patterns and components in everything. You learn to categorize things by function and purpose, you begin to see into the many layers of systems, and realize how they interact. I don't need to describe how this is useful to a developer
3. Understanding Needs-- You learn about what's useful to people and what isn't. You learn about what makes them comfortable and what makes them not want to do things. Understanding people's motivations and issues helps UI developers in tremendous ways.
Don't insist on a CS degree, you may be missing out on some extremely creative and intelligent people. I'm the first to admit that I would walk out of an interview if they asked me some bogus riddle question, or asked me something totally unrelated to what I've done, or some obscure thing that I haven't bothered to memorize because all you have to do is look it up in your favorite book.
Also, asking for code samples kind of sucks, because everything I've ever done belongs to someone else. Unlike a CS major, I don't have a body of work I did in school.
(What?? You what meee to feed my own children?? That's what government's for.)
Yeah. Starve the poor kids. It's their fault anyway. People like you should be ground up and made into food. And fed to poor children. Idiots like you are a great renewable resource. As long as we have Fox news, there will be jackasses like you.
Hah! I'd pay to see Noamie mop the floor with some of the intellectual lightweights that pass for conservative 'thinkers' like Anne Coulter or Sean Hannity. Of course, Noam would never stoop to such a thing. There are only two intelligent conservative 'pundits' out there, William F. Buckley and William Safire. There hasn't been a decent one since.
None of those 'conservatives' are intellectually very sophisticated (They pride themselves on their ignorance, actually). In a real debate, they would immediate go into personal attack mode anyway.
They're paid shills, they'll say anything. I bet if I paid Anne Coulter 10 million bucks, she wave a North Korean flag and sing The Internationale while escorting women into a Planned Parenthood clinic.
Ummm, what station is this? KQED? KPFA? Those are the only stations I know of around here that could possibly be considered 'liberal' by anyone's standards. You can't possibly mean KSFO ("Hot Talk")? If that's your idea of liberal, what's conservative? Heinrich Himmler's Social Realist Family Fun Show?
o'reilly is a brilliant catalyst... he knows his topics very well,
Please. O'Reilly is an obnoxious blowhard who illustrates his ignorance of his topics with his every word. Just recently I heard him give some shpiel about how Islam is the enemy of the United States, and that the Koran is on the same shelf as Mein Kampf. The man is a fool, and his audience are bigger fools for thinking that he has any insight at all other than faux-outrage.
Slashdot Mirror
My experience is similar, in relation to the logic sections of the LSAT, a test I prepped for, but never took. The key to situations like this is that there may be more than 1 answer that is, technically, correct, but there is one answer that is most correct, or is the best possible answer. They put these kinds of questions on there to find out if you can not just find a right answer, but find the best answer. That's why they have those.
Well, at least that last one they proposed didn't take off. The previous hike on cig taxes was at least supposed to go to health programs, and stop smoking programs. The most recent one (the one that didn't make it), was just going to go into the general fund. It was a straight jack on smokers, 'cause they're degenerates and can't fight back...
So basically, in a nutshell, their lives are worth less, and if we want to invade them, we should just invade them because we can and we feel like it and it's somehow in our interests to do so? Do you work for Chevron or something?
If you want to talk about naivete, how naive do you have to be to think that this whole business with Iraq is about anything other than oil, and the lucrative contracts that the US oil companies missed out on. A 'regime change' is the perfect opportunity to nullify the contracts they made with the French and Russians, and cut ourselves in on the deal.
If you think that this escapade has anything to do with terrorism, human rights, weapons of mass destruction, Saddam's 'nukular' capability or anything other than big bucks for oil companies, who's being naive now?
If you think it's OK to spend US$200 billion and who knows how many people's lives to make Iraq safe again for oil exploration, then so be it, but don't try and make this out to be some kind of 'protecting American lives' thing, because that ain't what it's about.
He said they didn't serve drinks with bull semen, and he said through clenched teeth
I don't know what's funnier, the fact that he got all mad about it, or that he was dumb enough to believe there's any actual cow content in Red Bull...
If you're talking about Hamas or Hezbollah, or any of the other Palestinian groups, he supports the secular ones, but not the Islamic fundy ones. If that's the case, then most every predominantly Muslim country in the region should also be invaded.
I realize that the mainstream media doesn't seem to make these distinctions, and the administration would prefer if you just took their word for it, but if you scratch the surface, things aren't as black and white as they seem.
Hey, if you can't get another job, you can at least go back to school to brush up on your spelling and grammar...(Which definitely needs work...)
I'm not a member of any political party, I tend to vote either Democrat or Green, but I have, and probably will again, vote for a Republican if I think they can do the best job.
Your party has been hijacked by people who at best are a minor segment of the Republican party, but somehow, every Republican in office or running for office feels like he has to throw them a bone, failing to realize that by telling them to get stuffed, they might be able to pick up more votes than they would have if every single one of those "Christians" voted.
Next time Ashcroft visits your home town (I don't have to worry, because Ashcroft would never, ever set foot in the SF Bay Area...) I suggest you go to see him speak, and be sure to dress up like a calico cat. (Ashcroft apparently believes that they are agents of Satan. Yes, he is the Attorney General.)
Those aren't environmentalists, those are NIMBYs
Not every software development effort has to be this startup company all-day all-night and weekends adventure.
One company I worked for actually had a development manager that told people to leave the office.
The cool solution I found was to become a contractor, in my contract it explicitly states that I cannot work more than 40 hours a week without approval from the VP of Engineering. I'm lovin' that!
Your linkage is bad. Besides, the sentiment is true, and it does appear in the version of The Internationale that I have (there are different versions). Just because some filthy godless comyanist said it, doesn't make the statement any less true. The fact is, that rights are merely priviledges extended to a chosen few if they're not enjoyed by everyone. The point is that if Muslims in the US can't get together and practice their religion, socialize with members of their mosque without being suspected of plotting to blow up a building, then they are not enjoying their rights as guaranteed by the constitution, which makes those rights no longer rights.
It's important to understand that the Bill of Rights does not give rights, but seeks to make sure that the government does not trample on the rights that we have as human beings and citizens from birth. The constitution also does not claim that these inalienable rights are the exclusive province of those lucky enough to live in the US, but rights that everyone everywhere has.
Emigrants have NEVER had the same rights as U.S citizens
Hey, Mr. Political Science, here's a lesson for ya:
An emigrant is someone who moves from Ohio to California, or from London to Brighton.
An immigrant is someone who moves from one country to another.
He could have gone to trial, but obviously didn't like his chances.
Well, that argument goes both ways. He pled guilty to taking up arms against US forces, but the conspiracy to kill Americans, and treason stuff probably couldn't be made to stick, either. They certainly couldn't get any of that prison uprising stuff on him.
At any rate, I'm not convinced that the poor schmuck is guilty of anything other than being in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Because we can't get Osama, guys like Lindh and Padilla are getting nailed.
I personally think that our intelligence people know exactly where OBL is, and they're waiting to nail him for a 2004 'October Surprise', in case they need it.
When you have a Bush in office, there is a 100% chance that there will be a war in the middle east.
This is one of those cases where if you repeat something often enough, it becomes commonly accepted as truth.
The UN inspectors were not "kicked out" by Hussein. They were, in fact, withdrawn by the UN when it became clear that Richard Butler, the guy who took over UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission on Munitions) from a Swedish guy whose name I forget, was furnishing the information gathered by the inspectors to the CIA in order to help the US military develop target packages for air strikes, in violation of UNSCOM's stated objectives.
UNSCOM was doing a fine job disarming Iraq until the US started co-opting the information, an interesting side-effect is that now the hawks are using this as justification for attacking Iraq. Funny how that works isn't it?
Double Bogus. Their stated objective is for the U.S. Military to give up its bases in the Holy Land, and for the U.S. to stop meddling in the affairs of (oil-producing) countries in the Middle East.
And as The Internationale says:
A right is merely priviledge extended unless enjoyed by all.
Dr. Benjamin Franklin
Where did "Doctor" Franklin get his Ph.D.?
This is interesting, because I see a lot of jobs out there that specifically ask for CS degrees. To my mind, a CS degree is not at all required to be a competent or even excellent Software Developer. My degree is in Sociology, which I'm sure some people scoff at, but for me it's been invaluable. What do you learn from Sociology? I'll tell you a couple of things that I take from Sociology that have helped me tremendously.
1. Developing Processes-- Sociologists learn to develop processes and methodologies for conducting research projects from scratch. Most (good) Sociology departments require students to develop and fine-tune their own research methodologies appropriate to the subject they wish to study. They give you the tools (statistical analysis, interview techniques), but you need to decide how you want to play it. I know you get these things in CS as well, but how many expect you to develop your own?
2. Big-Picture Views-- Sociologists are trained to look at societies, groups of people, etc. You begin to see patterns and components in everything. You learn to categorize things by function and purpose, you begin to see into the many layers of systems, and realize how they interact. I don't need to describe how this is useful to a developer
3. Understanding Needs-- You learn about what's useful to people and what isn't. You learn about what makes them comfortable and what makes them not want to do things. Understanding people's motivations and issues helps UI developers in tremendous ways.
Don't insist on a CS degree, you may be missing out on some extremely creative and intelligent people. I'm the first to admit that I would walk out of an interview if they asked me some bogus riddle question, or asked me something totally unrelated to what I've done, or some obscure thing that I haven't bothered to memorize because all you have to do is look it up in your favorite book.
Also, asking for code samples kind of sucks, because everything I've ever done belongs to someone else. Unlike a CS major, I don't have a body of work I did in school.
I dunno, 'American Beauty' and 'Shakedown Street' are both pretty good studio albums.
(What?? You what meee to feed my own children?? That's what government's for.)
Yeah. Starve the poor kids. It's their fault anyway. People like you should be ground up and made into food. And fed to poor children. Idiots like you are a great renewable resource. As long as we have Fox news, there will be jackasses like you.
None of those 'conservatives' are intellectually very sophisticated (They pride themselves on their ignorance, actually). In a real debate, they would immediate go into personal attack mode anyway.
They're paid shills, they'll say anything. I bet if I paid Anne Coulter 10 million bucks, she wave a North Korean flag and sing The Internationale while escorting women into a Planned Parenthood clinic.
Except for neo-liberals like Ronald Reagan. Now there's a confusing term if I've ever heard one...
Ummm, what station is this? KQED? KPFA? Those are the only stations I know of around here that could possibly be considered 'liberal' by anyone's standards. You can't possibly mean KSFO ("Hot Talk")? If that's your idea of liberal, what's conservative? Heinrich Himmler's Social Realist Family Fun Show?
o'reilly is a brilliant catalyst... he knows his topics very well,
Please. O'Reilly is an obnoxious blowhard who illustrates his ignorance of his topics with his every word. Just recently I heard him give some shpiel about how Islam is the enemy of the United States, and that the Koran is on the same shelf as Mein Kampf. The man is a fool, and his audience are bigger fools for thinking that he has any insight at all other than faux-outrage.
There's a reason why elephants were never domesticated...
They are domesticated, you fool. They are used as beasts of burden in places like India and Thailand.