Do you think that the milk producers of the milk you have there put the asterisked statement on your carton for informational purpose of their own volition or because they were compelled to, because if they hadn't, they'd be sued?
Unfortunately, this is part of a bigger trend. To wit: the past/. stories of people being fired for stuff they put on facebook when they're not on the clock about the stuff they when they're not on the clock.
I agree they're good reasons to not be at work, but why use sick days? And how many weddings are on weekdays? If bosses really are using these stalkers to follow people around on the weekend, then this truly does sound like an asshat type of m.o. I know, some people work on weekends, but I'm picturing the average cubicle denizen who works M-F 8-5.
As far as time and whatever else might be considered "convenience", you might be right. However, the principles of liberty and privacy are a big deal. Most of the arguments I've seen against the Threatened Sexual Assault policy are not about the inconvenience, but the further erosion or thwarting of such principles by the government for a goal that has been proven highly unattainable.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. It seems to me that you're saying they need Assange before they can take any action. I was saying that that's not necessary. As a non-citizen, he could probably be tried in absentia. That or the U.S. could find some other way to convict him.
It seems to me that you're making a leap by talking about question begging. If the leaks are illegal, the proof is already out there. Taking Assange prisoner, or not, would only be complementary to their case.
liberals focusing their hatred (or dislike or distrust or whathaveyou) on a person who seems worthy of it based on the pure battiness that spews from her mouth is indicative of a general nature of liberals as hateful? if i used a similar example polarizing figure, oh say, Obama, it appears that conservatives, and maybe libertarians, i don't pay much attention to them, are equally identifiable as such. you're gonna need a larger sample size than one if you're gonna generalize about such a large population.
it seems to me that even if some conservatives are trying to distance themselves from Palin, along with all the unadulterated bile coming from liberals, then it's Palin who is the cause of the maliciousness, not demonstrative of a general viciousness in liberals. even so, no one said that liberals can't hate someone. if they hate someone or sometwo or three or four? so what? conservatives complain about p.c. mushing everything up. perhaps they should be happy that liberals aren't p.c. about something for once.
so if i surf a lot of pr0n and republican/conservative websites (not my usual fare) it might throw them off of me personally, but i wonder how popular of a customer i'd become? if i have multiple tabs open in a variety topics, how will they catalogue me? or what if i use lynx? will they be able to tell i have a visual impairment?
you guys have been doing it longer, but we're all in on this. just like we have (had) the no. 1 economy in the world, we're not gonna stop until we lead the globe in governing by fear.
i've heard recently that people are calling and writing to airlines and congress people saying that they won't go on vacation because of these searches. tourist based economy areas don't want to hear this. i don't know how many people are voicing their anger over this issue to people who are supposed to do something (not saying they will) about this, but that was something i heard.
not that i'd want to climb the mountain, but if i went to the trouble of doing so, now i have to listen to some douche call his friends from there, like he's at a bar and is trying to figure out why he got stood up. it used to be that the wilderness was about savoring the remoteness and in the case of a strenuous endeavor like making the summit of Everest, reveling in your ability. now it's like you just walked across the city park. what's next an escalator?
NON-RES GRAD TUIT-FALL STUDENT ACTIVITY FEES ADVISING AND ASSESSMENT FEE ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE FEE ACADEMIC FACILITIES FEE AG SCI TECHNOLOGY FEE ASNR FAC/EQUIP FEE UNIV TECH/INFRASTRUCTURE MAINT ENERGY FEE TRANSIT/PARKING SVC FEE STUDENT ACTIVITY FEES HEALTH SERVICE FEES STUDENT FACILITY FEE STUDENT DEVELOPMENT FEE RECORDS MAINTENANCE FEE LIBRARY AUTOMATION/TECH FEE
one of these fees already could probably cover that stupid course materials fee. fucking fees...
what with the idiots in the state of TX eviscerating science texts in their ignorant endeavor to eliminate evolution and thus setting text standards, why would i want to be forced to pay a fee for a science text that has no real science in it. bloody ludicrous.
conservatives hate: scientists and unions. i imagine there will be some kind of counter-campaign to smear the Public Science members at some point. another CRU incident maybe?
of course what i just wrote is based on politics too. it's hard to see how rationality can trump ignorance when the ignorant have the bully pulpit to shout down the rationalists.
He said he was certain that agents who installed it would have obtained a 30-day warrant for its use.
as a former agent, sure he's sure. he needs to make them look good. but there are a few examples of Justice Dept. agents not following the law. it'd be great to know if the agents had or hadn't followed the letter of the law here.
having just read a local paper's comment section to an opinion piece and seeing the first comment intentionally rude, you'd think i'd agree that with Reuters. but i don't. the anonymity of blog and news site commenters probably is not the engine of incivility in politics. there are people who are just outright angry about certain things, justifiably so or not, and they don't care how they express themselves. especially when so many of those people seem to lack an education or even knowledge of etiquette.
The Bush Corporate Bailout Bill was not a progressive policy. It was a policy of a corporatist. Or whatever one would describe Bush as. I don't think "progressive" applies. Those "progressive" big banks that were crying for the money probably had a lot to do with the legislation as well.
i think the people on/. who are complaining about the opt in were thinking more like the type of folks who want to protect their property. i'm pretty sure that's not a strictly progressive plank.
or you might just expect to be able to have a few (or several dozen) drinks on the weekend or whenever you feel like (not on work time obviously) and not think that makes you a poor employee or candidate. drinking for most working adults is not illegal and is perfectly normal. how does that sully one's character? telling jokes, good or bad? perfectly human. drug use is illegal, a.f.a.i.k. so, telling someone, 'oops you drank too much this weekend, you're on probation', is bullshit. what the hell does it matter what you do on your own time, if it's not illegal?
people talk about a nanny state. this is where it really starts. someone needs to sink that company quick.
i run. if i run 50 miles out in a remote park, that might seem irrational to someone else who's scared of the outdoors. is it risky behavior? yes, i suppose it could be construed that way if you don't know anything about fitness or the outdoors. but if i didn't do something like that, i might do something really risky, such as smashing equipment or hardware at work. everybody's got an outlet that for the most part is not going to affect their work life. while i think these social sites are a waste of time, what's worse is the fact that now they're set ups for surveilling people's recreation and the worrisome impacts of such fun. they're outlets for people to talk shit to each other or gripe or whatever. now they're being used a litmus test for the perfect person. ridiculous.
you mean like stop-and-frisks? and arresting without charges to sort things out later? cops wouldn't needlessly harass people. never in a million years. but they do have jobs to do and numbers to meet and their bosses won't suffer a poor attitude.
while i've set up a Gmail account, i've never actually used it. partly because of all the other ways that Google has of data mining their users, the Gmail account would like icing on the cake to them. they'd have access to all of the people you associate with, on top of your interests and usual WWW practices. the latter is enough info already.
as far as nerds are concerned, how comfortable would a pasty, pudgy nerd feel wielding a weapon with a similar hilt as the Obi Wan ANH saber? that handle would probably feel uncomfortable to even those used to holding similar weapons.
it's kind of disturbing to think that being a observant bystander of police at work is grounds for arrest or even conviction. this kind of fits in with the mentality that the police are infallible and shouldn't need oversight. an idea i find hard to swallow.
Slashdot Mirror
Do you think that the milk producers of the milk you have there put the asterisked statement on your carton for informational purpose of their own volition or because they were compelled to, because if they hadn't, they'd be sued?
Unfortunately, this is part of a bigger trend. To wit: the past /. stories of people being fired for stuff they put on facebook when they're not on the clock about the stuff they when they're not on the clock.
I agree they're good reasons to not be at work, but why use sick days? And how many weddings are on weekdays? If bosses really are using these stalkers to follow people around on the weekend, then this truly does sound like an asshat type of m.o. I know, some people work on weekends, but I'm picturing the average cubicle denizen who works M-F 8-5.
As far as time and whatever else might be considered "convenience", you might be right. However, the principles of liberty and privacy are a big deal. Most of the arguments I've seen against the Threatened Sexual Assault policy are not about the inconvenience, but the further erosion or thwarting of such principles by the government for a goal that has been proven highly unattainable.
Sorry, I wasn't clear. It seems to me that you're saying they need Assange before they can take any action. I was saying that that's not necessary. As a non-citizen, he could probably be tried in absentia. That or the U.S. could find some other way to convict him.
It seems to me that you're making a leap by talking about question begging. If the leaks are illegal, the proof is already out there. Taking Assange prisoner, or not, would only be complementary to their case.
liberals focusing their hatred (or dislike or distrust or whathaveyou) on a person who seems worthy of it based on the pure battiness that spews from her mouth is indicative of a general nature of liberals as hateful? if i used a similar example polarizing figure, oh say, Obama, it appears that conservatives, and maybe libertarians, i don't pay much attention to them, are equally identifiable as such. you're gonna need a larger sample size than one if you're gonna generalize about such a large population.
it seems to me that even if some conservatives are trying to distance themselves from Palin, along with all the unadulterated bile coming from liberals, then it's Palin who is the cause of the maliciousness, not demonstrative of a general viciousness in liberals. even so, no one said that liberals can't hate someone. if they hate someone or sometwo or three or four? so what? conservatives complain about p.c. mushing everything up. perhaps they should be happy that liberals aren't p.c. about something for once.
so if i surf a lot of pr0n and republican/conservative websites (not my usual fare) it might throw them off of me personally, but i wonder how popular of a customer i'd become? if i have multiple tabs open in a variety topics, how will they catalogue me?
or what if i use lynx? will they be able to tell i have a visual impairment?
i was going to comment about "smart" bombs and their effectiveness at avoiding civilian casualties. i'm assuming this is the miniaturized version?
you guys have been doing it longer, but we're all in on this. just like we have (had) the no. 1 economy in the world, we're not gonna stop until we lead the globe in governing by fear.
i've heard recently that people are calling and writing to airlines and congress people saying that they won't go on vacation because of these searches. tourist based economy areas don't want to hear this. i don't know how many people are voicing their anger over this issue to people who are supposed to do something (not saying they will) about this, but that was something i heard.
so, yes, i'm supporting the rumor mill.
what happens to the tents that are sprayed with foam? are these reusable? or is it more trash? if trashed, that doesn't seem so green.
not that i'd want to climb the mountain, but if i went to the trouble of doing so, now i have to listen to some douche call his friends from there, like he's at a bar and is trying to figure out why he got stood up. it used to be that the wilderness was about savoring the remoteness and in the case of a strenuous endeavor like making the summit of Everest, reveling in your ability. now it's like you just walked across the city park. what's next an escalator?
you want to talk about fees?
NON-RES GRAD TUIT-FALL
STUDENT ACTIVITY FEES
ADVISING AND ASSESSMENT FEE
ACADEMIC EXCELLENCE FEE
ACADEMIC FACILITIES FEE
AG SCI TECHNOLOGY FEE
ASNR FAC/EQUIP FEE
UNIV TECH/INFRASTRUCTURE MAINT
ENERGY FEE
TRANSIT/PARKING SVC FEE
STUDENT ACTIVITY FEES
HEALTH SERVICE FEES
STUDENT FACILITY FEE
STUDENT DEVELOPMENT FEE
RECORDS MAINTENANCE FEE
LIBRARY AUTOMATION/TECH FEE
one of these fees already could probably cover that stupid course materials fee. fucking fees...
what with the idiots in the state of TX eviscerating science texts in their ignorant endeavor to eliminate evolution and thus setting text standards, why would i want to be forced to pay a fee for a science text that has no real science in it. bloody ludicrous.
conservatives hate: scientists and unions. i imagine there will be some kind of counter-campaign to smear the Public Science members at some point. another CRU incident maybe?
of course what i just wrote is based on politics too. it's hard to see how rationality can trump ignorance when the ignorant have the bully pulpit to shout down the rationalists.
the article quotes a former FBI agent:
He said he was certain that agents who installed it would have obtained a 30-day warrant for its use.
as a former agent, sure he's sure. he needs to make them look good. but there are a few examples of Justice Dept. agents not following the law. it'd be great to know if the agents had or hadn't followed the letter of the law here.
having just read a local paper's comment section to an opinion piece and seeing the first comment intentionally rude, you'd think i'd agree that with Reuters. but i don't. the anonymity of blog and news site commenters probably is not the engine of incivility in politics. there are people who are just outright angry about certain things, justifiably so or not, and they don't care how they express themselves. especially when so many of those people seem to lack an education or even knowledge of etiquette.
The Bush Corporate Bailout Bill was not a progressive policy. It was a policy of a corporatist. Or whatever one would describe Bush as. I don't think "progressive" applies. Those "progressive" big banks that were crying for the money probably had a lot to do with the legislation as well.
i think the people on /. who are complaining about the opt in were thinking more like the type of folks who want to protect their property. i'm pretty sure that's not a strictly progressive plank.
or you might just expect to be able to have a few (or several dozen) drinks on the weekend or whenever you feel like (not on work time obviously) and not think that makes you a poor employee or candidate. drinking for most working adults is not illegal and is perfectly normal. how does that sully one's character? telling jokes, good or bad? perfectly human. drug use is illegal, a.f.a.i.k. so, telling someone, 'oops you drank too much this weekend, you're on probation', is bullshit. what the hell does it matter what you do on your own time, if it's not illegal?
people talk about a nanny state. this is where it really starts. someone needs to sink that company quick.
i run. if i run 50 miles out in a remote park, that might seem irrational to someone else who's scared of the outdoors. is it risky behavior? yes, i suppose it could be construed that way if you don't know anything about fitness or the outdoors. but if i didn't do something like that, i might do something really risky, such as smashing equipment or hardware at work. everybody's got an outlet that for the most part is not going to affect their work life. while i think these social sites are a waste of time, what's worse is the fact that now they're set ups for surveilling people's recreation and the worrisome impacts of such fun. they're outlets for people to talk shit to each other or gripe or whatever. now they're being used a litmus test for the perfect person. ridiculous.
you mean like stop-and-frisks? and arresting without charges to sort things out later? cops wouldn't needlessly harass people. never in a million years. but they do have jobs to do and numbers to meet and their bosses won't suffer a poor attitude.
while i've set up a Gmail account, i've never actually used it. partly because of all the other ways that Google has of data mining their users, the Gmail account would like icing on the cake to them. they'd have access to all of the people you associate with, on top of your interests and usual WWW practices. the latter is enough info already.
as far as nerds are concerned, how comfortable would a pasty, pudgy nerd feel wielding a weapon with a similar hilt as the Obi Wan ANH saber? that handle would probably feel uncomfortable to even those used to holding similar weapons.
not only that. the "rocks" behind him looked like some kind of crinkled up fabric. i thought it looked kind of lousy.
and it gets easier and easier with stuff like this. sure you can use it for a practical joke, but i see more potential harm than fun with this.
it's kind of disturbing to think that being a observant bystander of police at work is grounds for arrest or even conviction. this kind of fits in with the mentality that the police are infallible and shouldn't need oversight. an idea i find hard to swallow.