In other news, countries that have been stealing US jobs and screwing US workers for years due to imbalanced trade deals are pissed that those days are over.
Why we in the US should be in any way unhappy that India will be less effective at stealing our jobs is beyond me.
And here we have a fine AC liberal specimen flourishing it it's natural habitat, complete with zero argument and ad homonym attacks. The complete set is not as rare as you might think.
So your argument is based on the logical fallacy damning the source and conflating correlation with causation? My debate professor would have failed you. How about you support your argument by finding a source with actual evidence that says that 208 of the founding fathers/authors/signers of the declaration of independence weren't churchgoing Christians? Oh that's right, you can't because they were. You complain because my sources exist specifically in response to all of the revisionist BS that your professors fed you in college, that you are now regurgitating at me. There is evidence for maybe two of the founders being Diests (not Atheists mind you, just Diests not affiliated directly with any denomination). Hard evidence on any of the other 206 not being Christians? Anyone? Anyone? Beuler?
Your evidence that the founders weren't Christians is that they just went to church because everyone did back then just further supports my assertion that the US was founded as a Christian nation that was founded on Judeo-Christian values even more if everyone around the time of its founding was going to church. Beyond that, these were grown ass men, many of them in the military, are you seriously saying that they would have gone to church every Sunday just because everyone was doing it, even after they fought a war for the freedom to worship how they wanted or to not worship?!?! There are literally mountains of evidence that nearly all of the founding fathers were Christian, if you are willing to open your eyes and do the research.
BTW, calling Christians fundamentalist nutjobs is Bigoted, Google the definition. If you are such a big liberal, where is your tolerance for beliefs and viewpoints other than your own? It kind of sounds like you are one of those fascist progressives.
Freedom of religion: every person is free to pursue or practice their religion or non religion within the laws of the land (sorry, no human sacrifice, honor killings, violent Jihad, female mutilation or subjugation, no Sharia law.) There are limits.
Freedom from religion: all public officials must be Atheists or they cannot use their personal faith and beliefs to inform their decision making process and actions in their publicly held office. This is probably what you want, but it aint in the constitution, sorry.
As you can see, freedom of and freedom from are very different things.
Dunno, maybe I was just lucky but I always just activated online. Yes the activation keys are annoying, but I haven't had to enter one in 5 years or so. I have had to do things like disable the GWX malware and the windows genuine advantage phone home update and after GWX I just generally disabled all auto updating and do it manually now.
The sad truth is though is that Microsoft's douchebaggery is only able to happen because of the total shit state of copyright and patents and general software consumer protections in this country that has been perpetrated by both parties looking for lobbyist cash. If software consumers were protected to the same degree that real goods purchasers were protected, MS CEO chief assclown Nadala would have already been perp walked between GWX and system breaking forced updates that literally damage other people's property and business.
I am no fan of MS, but Windows 7 was a solid version and more or less the standard of what I expect from the Windows OS.
Microsoft is treating the home PC user like a game console customer. If your Xbone kicks you out of a game to update, well, its just a game. Most people will tolerate that, though they may not like it.
It seems to escape MS that people treat the "it just works all the time" facet of the PC as a necessity. People have much of their lives and livelihood invested in their computers these days, and computers have matured as an industry to the point where people expect to treat them like a car: any automaker that came to your house in the middle of the night to drain your fuel tank so they could fix a faulty wire design flaw that they created and then when you got up in the morning you were stranded because there was no gas in the tank, that car maker would be sued into oblivion. Yet MS does essentially this on a weekly basis to millions of Windows 10 users and gets away with it for now, but as more tech savvy judges get on the bench, MS days with this kind of shenanigan are numbered.
I have been using this great OS called Windows 7. It does what I want when I want it to. I never get forced updates, I haven't seen a blue screen in like 5 years. It doesn't come preloaded with spyware or malvertising. I want to spread the news of this great alternative (checks interwebs)... Windows 7 market share: 48.3% Windows 10 market share: 24.3%.
I call BS on this one. Locking guests out of their rooms, sure. Locking guests into their rooms? Uh no. Basic fire code requires that all electronic locks always allow egress, regardless of their lock state or powered/unpowered. Basically, the mechanical locking mechanism can always be opened from the inside, regardless of how the electronic locks are hacked or malfunction.
I will leave the discussion on liberals for another time, since what I describe has been exclusively my experience in dealing with them. There are exceptions to every rule, and maybe you are one, but the exceptions don't make (or break) the rule.
Regarding an armed conflict with China, you made my point. The US is not going to start a shooting war with China. The US is not in the business of starting wars, we react to defend ourselves and our allies. If China were to start a shooting war, it would end badly for them http://www.globalfirepower.com... as long as we don't run out of munitions (which I am pretty sure we will not). I ignored the fact that China would also be facing every NATO ally, as well as the JSDF locally http://www.globalfirepower.com... , and just about every other country in the Asian Pacific except for North Korea. The Chinese have been pissing off everyone around them with their attempted expansions in the South China Seas. The point I was making was that it is still in China's best interest to get along with the US, even though they may now have to play on an even playing field economically.
Muslim terrorists accounted for ~20% of all US murders in 2001. Sounds pretty damn statistically significant to me. And that was just one successful attack by less than 20 people. If you factor in the death rate for the age group killed (average age was 40) it was even more significant statistically. Just because they haven't been having much success in the US more recently doesn't mean they won't keep trying and it doesn't mean we need to import more terrorists.
The UN exists for this kind of thing and should have set up refugee camps long ago and still should to provide safe haven for the refugees. ISIS will leave armed, well positioned solders and civilians alone, or die quickly, especially when they are backed by the US military.
BTW, Obama banned the same Muslim countries in 2011 and no one lost their shit or protested.
Statistically, maybe. In reality, only if you are an idiot. So if you screen out all of the idiots doing dangerous things around their furniture (or living in earthquake zones with heavy, un-anchored furniture), then the odds go to zero... Meaning that no, your furniture is not more dangerous than terrorists. Care to try again?
The only thing being proved here is that there are many people who are bad at understanding statistics.
SJW mods, please note: disagreeing with my comments does not make the facts overrated or flamebait, and I am certainly not a troll. Feel free to scream into a pillow instead if you need to let off steam, but don't break the Slashdot mod system simply because you disagree with someone. You claim to be tolerant, live it.
Laws were based on the 10 commandments (it was illegal to murder, steal, commit adultery, tell a lie under oath, etc.) http://www.bibleinfo.com/en/to... While there were other contemporary and historical countries like England with similar laws, they still originate from the 10 commandments. And no Hamurabi's law is not the same thing (and it is actually unlikely that it was first, if you actually want to look at the facts rather than pointed headed professors pet theories aka wild ass guesses).
Here is a list of the founding fathers and their religious affiliations. http://www.adherents.com/gov/F... Notice that there are no Muslims, Atheists, Hindus, Buddhists etc. on that list. The men who wrote the constitution had at their core Judeo-Christian principles and those came through in the constitution. They appeal to God as the source of every person's basic rights in the Declaration of Independence for crying out loud. Everything was centered around ensuring people could live freely and practice Christianity which is why the first Amendment is about freedom of religion and speech. (Note that it is freedom of religion, not freedom from religion or separation of church and state, which does not exist in the constitution at all, the establishment clause only precludes the state from enforcing one religion on the populous).
Regardless of the revisionist BS history lies masquerading as "theories" that have been spread by the progressives as "facts", the truth is there if you are interested in looking, but you must be willing to listen instead of trying to drown out truth and reason with the sound of your own voice.
When asked over the years, I have always told potential employers that my value is based on my skillset and interpersonal skills. I ask that they make an offer based on the value that I will bring to their business, and that my past compensation is private and confidential. They typically don't like it in HR, but you get respect from the good managers. I have found that you get much higher offers than if you put down your past salary, where you get a ~5-10% higher offer than your past salary, rather than the true market rate for your skillset, which is typically higher.
OK, if you want to play the odds argument with me, MightyMartian. I have a bowl of 1000 chocolates for you to try. One of the chocolates is poisoned and will kill you in minutes with no antidote. Still want to eat any of the chocolates from my bowl? No, you most certainly will not, because while the risk is statistically low, it is an easily avoidable risk, and you can get non-poisoned candy just about anywhere. Yet here you are, making the argument to pour more candies into the bowl, even though you know that some of the new candies will be poisoned too. And you expect all of us, and our children to eat a few, with the argument being that the odds of anyone dying are pretty low... even though it is a nearly 100% certainty that some innocent people will die. It sounds pretty foolish when all the bleeding heart PC bullshit is stripped away doesn't it?
Also, just note that the highest lifetime or old age killers are heart disease and cancer, however, these are accepted and as of now unavoidable risks. Terrorists tend to kill preferentially people in their prime along with children. The impact on society of an old person dying of cancer is minimal and to a degree expected (we all have to die of something), while the death of a child or adult in their prime is far more disruptive and detrimental to individuals, families and society as a whole. Also, the mortality rate in those age brackets makes the chances of dying from terrorism exponentially larger, since very few children or 30 year old adults die of heart disease or cancer.
Beyond the simple statistics is the problem I allude to in my chocolates example. Terrorist attacks are a largely avoidable phenomena (check out Japan, they keep a close eye on their Muslim residents, including surveillance cameras in mosques and have had no terrorist attacks, BTW: funny no one shit a brick when Japan did this). To avoid Islamist terrorists, you must first realize that Islam practiced to the letter is violent and completely incompatible with the US laws and constitution, as well as American values and traditions. We allow freedom of religion up to the point where it violates the law. If your religion requires human sacrifice, and you kill someone in the practice of your religion, we sure as hell will hunt you down and prosecute you for committing murder. Many of the facets of Islam and Sharia law also violate basic laws in the US, up to and including honor killings, and killing the infidel and violent jihad, which are out and out murder.
We should do no less than any other nation and demand that all immigrants who come to America respect our laws and out beliefs, and if that is too much to ask of them, then they need to leave. We provide for freedom of religion, up to the point where that religion teaches treason, condones murder, mutilation and subjugation of women, slavery (and the list goes on).
The promise of freedom and prosperity that America offers comes at the price of requiring immigrants to become American, something that has almost been forgotten with all the multicultural BS. We are America, and we have our own culture. If your religion precludes you from adopting our beliefs, then I am sorry, but there is the door. America was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy (sorry revisionists, you can suck it) and Islam played no part in our founding documents, no Muslim blood was shed to free us from oppression, and in fact, America's first armed conflict after gaining our independence was against Muslims (Barbary wars 1801-1816) who we had to go to war with because they were just as evil as the Islamists are today.
The US allows in more than 1,000,000 immigrants every year, more than any other country, but that doesn't mean we have to be stupid about it. There are plenty of people in line who do not ascribe to a worldview that is diametrically opposed to our beliefs.
Regarding the humanitarian crisis and refugees, it is much safer and more effective to set up safe zones in Iraq and Syria with UN soldiers from Muslim nati
"Oh really, is that what China is going to do? "Suck it up"? "
China's options: Option1: suck it up, accept that fair trade still boosts their economy and live with a balanced trade ratio with the US Option 2: start a trade war because the US is a less lucrative market that it was in the past, potentially lose $500B annually of their overseas market. Potentially lose over $1T in US debt that they hold. Option 3: start a shooting war with the US. Face the most advanced military on the planet with 2000 nukes and 10 aircraft carrier groups and 14 nuclear equipped Trident II submarines. China brings 1 million soldiers, 200 nukes and 1 aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear ballistic missile subs. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, he had 1 million soldiers as well. It didn't take long for the US military to decimate them. China has been working hard for the last 8 years to steal our tech, because they know that numbers are virtually meaningless on today's battlefield.
"Really? It's Iran who is happy to set the fire? Not the newly-emboldened global policy "experts" who believe that diplomacy is "shut up and take it, cause we're 'murica?". "
The US policy for a long time was to uplift other countries by giving them deals that allowed for trade imbalance in their favor. With the end of the cold war, those policies should have ended, but they didn't. No other country on the planet would tolerate such imbalanced deals and the US no longer can either. Your attitude reveals your complete lack of experience or knowledge on the subject. I invite you to go and visit Iran, since you are so enlightened. Make sure to advocate your ideals while you are there, and spout off about various religions.
"Well, anyway, Mr. "LeftCoastThinker" I bet you've done well in your career and have many friends and personal successes. Your handle is great, because I am sure that you're the only smart person with all those dumb liberals there on the coast. LOL."
Fairly accurate in your assessment, although there are plenty of other smart people out here, the problem with liberals is not raw intelligence, it is emotional maturity and common sense. Typically exposure to the real world and the economy (working, getting laid off, having friends in law enforcement and the military, paying bills, paying taxes, running a business, etc.) tends to cure these over time, but these days there are many professions (along with welfare) that are immune to many of the above, (or create insulating, self re-enforcing echo chambers), leading to emotionally immature, ignorant sections of the population with a raging case of confirmation bias and ignorant pseudo-righteousness.
This exactly. And beyond that, who exactly is going to nuke who? Russia is happy with our new president. China may get pissed at him because the days of them screwing the US are over, but unless they want to write off $1,130,000,000,000 in US debt that they own, along with $500B/year of very lucrative trade with the US, they will suck it up. China is not stupid, they have 200 nukes, the US has 2,000.
The only real hazard right now is the 10 year clock that started when Iran signed the nuclear deal, which guarantees a terrorist fanatic regime nuclear capability in 10 years. Those crazy bastards want to watch the world burn and are happy to set the fire.
Having paid for everything as I went and gotten an AA from a junior college, BS from a 4 year, as well as MS and PhD and then teaching for 4 years as well as working in the private sector for 17 years, the entire college system is out of balance.
- JCs have become a second chance at high school for many students (I did it because I had to pay for everything myself, but saw the mentality first hand). - 4 year state schools are filled with students who are distracted by constant partying and/or perfecting the art of the hookup. - Post graduate education is essentially indentured servitude of degree holding adults who could be making $60k/year in the private sector teaching themselves and teaching undergrads because their professor hates teaching and wants to spend all of their time doing research.
We need to revamp our high schools similar to the way that Japan runs them, where if you screw off and get shit grades in junior high or high school, you get kicked out and have to go to vocational school to learn a trade (which can often be just as lucrative as a 4 year degree, but requires less brains). You don't get to go to college unless you get a diploma or a GED and maybe some minimum score on the SATs. This reduces the overcrowding at the university level, as well as the party mentality currently found there.
To reduce college costs, all student housing and meals should be run privately by lowest bidder every 3 years and pricing should be tied to market surveys for the city in which the university exists. i.e. if the average local 1 bedroom apartment costs $500/month and you have 3 roommates, you should only pay $125/month for housing. If the local sit down restaurant charges $4 for a Caesar salad, the college can't charge $9, especially for an inferior product (this happens and its ridiculous).
First and foremost we must force our colleges to refocus from BS PC agenda majors/GE requirements to the core goal of college: providing the tools for students to get jobs. GE requirements should be eliminated completely and each department every 3 years must be forced to show justification that they are creating professionals for actual job market needs and getting a 75% or higher placement rate in those fields, otherwise they no longer get any tax payer funding. Actual tuition should be 50% paid for by the state through taxes if you maintain a 3.0 or higher in a degree field that is profitable (when you apply for your college, you have to present a plan and a market study on the job market you are targeting when you graduate, how much you will make in 1-5-10 years and how much debt you will cary and when it will be paid off). The other 50% should be loans/grants out of pocket etc. However, since the tax payer is footing the bill for your degree, if your GPA drops below 3.0, you go on probation, and if you drop below 2.0, you get expelled and have to go to vocational school or get a job. Today, we have far too many people educated beyond their intelligence who can't understand why they can't get a job with their English/liberal arts/poli sci/Chicano studies/underwater basket weaving degree and are being crushed under mountains of student loan debt that they should never have taken on to begin with. Unless you are independently wealthy, you should be doing a cost benefit analysis to see if your degree is worth anything near what you are paying for it.
Sate run colleges should be focused on teaching and eliminate the practice of tenure. Professors who consistently score low in the quality of their students reviews and/or subsequent performance should go on probation and if not improved, termination. They should have a separate branch that is dedicated to research. If a professor can pull in enough grant money to cover his salary, (s)he can move over to the research branch and the college can hire a new professor to teach. Thus the professors who are teaching must be focused on teaching, and the professors focused on research can focus on their research. Students and graduates who want to work on research must be paid prevailing wage for their qualifications and they can get credits for working on the project.
OK, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are genuinely ignorant and not just trying to be a troll. You do know that the US is a net exporter of oil right... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The war in Afghanistan was because a few monsters over there murdered 3000 US civilians, and the ruling body in Afghanistan sided with those monsters, so we killed them. You remember that right? There is/was no oil in Afghanistan...
The war in Iraq happened because Saddam Hussein had a huge stockpile of chemical weapons (previously well documented in the 80s and previously used on the Kurds in 1988 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared... ) and had Uranium (550 tons http://www.nbcnews.com/id/2554...), was trying to buy more and refine it (we found the centrifuges buried in a civilian district of Baghdad http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/... ) and he kicked the IAEA/weapons inspectors out of Iraq. He thought we would blink because we were already involved in Afghanistan, but we didn't and that was what triggered the Iraq war.
We didn't take over any Iraq oil fields and we don't import it. We spent $2,000B on the Iraq war http://www.reuters.com/article... while the Iraq oil production is worth a piddling $25B/year. http://www.theglobalist.com/ir... If you think the Iraq war was about oil or for profit, you are either ignorant or a moron or both.
We need the US war machine so that the Russians and/or the Chinese (or Iran for that mater), don't try to subjugate the rest of the world. I suspect under Trump, a lot of other modern countries who have been getting a free ride as far as protection via the US military will start shouldering their fair share of expenses, so we may well have more cash, but that will probably go to actually building things like power plants, transmission lines, roads and airports, rather than more "green jobs." We already tried that under BHO and we got Solyndra. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
This largely depends on how the survey was worded. I am all for developing alternative energy sources, but I am also realistic about how feasible and financially viable it is. Right now there are a few criteria that need to be met for US power needs:
1. The power must be economically competitive with existing sources. Current solar PV arrays are about on par with natural gas turbines. 2. Power available as it is needed 24/7/365. This is the difficulty that comes with solar PV, wind etc.
If tomorrow someone perfects the ultra high capacity liquid metal battery http://news.mit.edu/2016/batte... or some other way to efficiently store massive amounts of energy efficiently then solar and wind and other alternative power sources become grid wide viable options for baseline generation. As it is, no renewable power source works reliably when the sun goes down/wind randomly stops blowing. I have over 5kW of solar panels myself, because it made financial sense and paid for it'self within about 10 years.
This exactly. The CEO on down the chain to the individual employees who facilitated fraud need to be charged with felony wire fraud and face 10 years in the federal pen. On top of this, Western Union should be required to provide a full refund to every fraudulent transaction that they facilitated to the victims since their employees were helping facilitate the fraud. If it were truly 1 in 100,000 as they claim, they should be able to absorb the costs easily. If this bankrupts them, tough shit, don't let your employees perpetrate fraud.
If you have a president who is a leader (not a spoiled child) they are typically the leader of their party, and they set much of the legislative agenda. Bush inherited a recession (dot com bubble) from Clinton and then had 9-11. His hands were full. Beyond that, Bush was a conservative, and copyright is good for businesses, thus he was not going to shorten it. Obama, on the other hand, purported to be for the people, aka. a populist, but contrary to his rhetoric, he did jack shit on out of control patents and copyright. Trump is now president, and he is a true populist (what Obama claimed to be). Just today he killed TPP, as Obama should have done a long time ago. People have to stop looking at the D or R after someone's name and pay attention to what they are doing.
Well, there's great news for this guy. In a few years, autonomous cars will eliminate the need for drivers, and this guy won't have a car to sleep in, or an income at all. The moral to this story is if you want to make a good living, get a marketable skill that takes some skill to develop and is in demand. Since virtually every adult in the US can drive, driving services were never going to be a cash cow. Machinist, electrician, elevator repair, commercial equipment service and repair, etc. are the way to go. To a certain degree, this is the sad result of not teaching even one class in high school on basic applied economics (supply and demand, markets etc.)
Based on this response, I'm 95% sure that it was Samsung that did not allow enough space for the battery to expand under load in the battery bay of the phone. The battery case is typically not strong enough to compress the battery as it expands, intentionally. Given the fact that the Samsung CEO is looking at bribery charges and how they handled the failures and recall in the first place, I don't trust Samsung as far as I can throw them without a lot more detail than what was provided today.
The fact that they acknowledge that the first round of failures was not enough room for the battery to expand (but blame it on a paper thin battery case, rather than their much thicker and more rigid phone structure), and fail to describe what the failure mode was for the replacement batteries, (just calling it a manufacturing defect) leads me to believe that both failures were Samsung's fault for not allowing enough expansion space for the battery to expand in the battery bay. It will be informative when the lawsuits go through discovery to see what they can find. (Unless Samsung just buys them off.) The smoking gun will probably come from the battery manufacturers recommended expansion volumes vs what the Note actually had in terms of battery bay space.
Slashdot Mirror
In other news, countries that have been stealing US jobs and screwing US workers for years due to imbalanced trade deals are pissed that those days are over.
Why we in the US should be in any way unhappy that India will be less effective at stealing our jobs is beyond me.
And here we have a fine AC liberal specimen flourishing it it's natural habitat, complete with zero argument and ad homonym attacks. The complete set is not as rare as you might think.
So your argument is based on the logical fallacy damning the source and conflating correlation with causation? My debate professor would have failed you. How about you support your argument by finding a source with actual evidence that says that 208 of the founding fathers/authors/signers of the declaration of independence weren't churchgoing Christians? Oh that's right, you can't because they were. You complain because my sources exist specifically in response to all of the revisionist BS that your professors fed you in college, that you are now regurgitating at me. There is evidence for maybe two of the founders being Diests (not Atheists mind you, just Diests not affiliated directly with any denomination). Hard evidence on any of the other 206 not being Christians? Anyone? Anyone? Beuler?
Your evidence that the founders weren't Christians is that they just went to church because everyone did back then just further supports my assertion that the US was founded as a Christian nation that was founded on Judeo-Christian values even more if everyone around the time of its founding was going to church. Beyond that, these were grown ass men, many of them in the military, are you seriously saying that they would have gone to church every Sunday just because everyone was doing it, even after they fought a war for the freedom to worship how they wanted or to not worship?!?! There are literally mountains of evidence that nearly all of the founding fathers were Christian, if you are willing to open your eyes and do the research.
BTW, calling Christians fundamentalist nutjobs is Bigoted, Google the definition. If you are such a big liberal, where is your tolerance for beliefs and viewpoints other than your own? It kind of sounds like you are one of those fascist progressives.
Freedom of religion: every person is free to pursue or practice their religion or non religion within the laws of the land (sorry, no human sacrifice, honor killings, violent Jihad, female mutilation or subjugation, no Sharia law.) There are limits.
Freedom from religion: all public officials must be Atheists or they cannot use their personal faith and beliefs to inform their decision making process and actions in their publicly held office. This is probably what you want, but it aint in the constitution, sorry.
As you can see, freedom of and freedom from are very different things.
Dunno, maybe I was just lucky but I always just activated online. Yes the activation keys are annoying, but I haven't had to enter one in 5 years or so. I have had to do things like disable the GWX malware and the windows genuine advantage phone home update and after GWX I just generally disabled all auto updating and do it manually now.
The sad truth is though is that Microsoft's douchebaggery is only able to happen because of the total shit state of copyright and patents and general software consumer protections in this country that has been perpetrated by both parties looking for lobbyist cash. If software consumers were protected to the same degree that real goods purchasers were protected, MS CEO chief assclown Nadala would have already been perp walked between GWX and system breaking forced updates that literally damage other people's property and business.
I am no fan of MS, but Windows 7 was a solid version and more or less the standard of what I expect from the Windows OS.
Microsoft is treating the home PC user like a game console customer. If your Xbone kicks you out of a game to update, well, its just a game. Most people will tolerate that, though they may not like it.
It seems to escape MS that people treat the "it just works all the time" facet of the PC as a necessity. People have much of their lives and livelihood invested in their computers these days, and computers have matured as an industry to the point where people expect to treat them like a car: any automaker that came to your house in the middle of the night to drain your fuel tank so they could fix a faulty wire design flaw that they created and then when you got up in the morning you were stranded because there was no gas in the tank, that car maker would be sued into oblivion. Yet MS does essentially this on a weekly basis to millions of Windows 10 users and gets away with it for now, but as more tech savvy judges get on the bench, MS days with this kind of shenanigan are numbered.
I have been using this great OS called Windows 7. It does what I want when I want it to. I never get forced updates, I haven't seen a blue screen in like 5 years. It doesn't come preloaded with spyware or malvertising. I want to spread the news of this great alternative (checks interwebs)...
Windows 7 market share: 48.3%
Windows 10 market share: 24.3%.
Oh, OK, well then my work here is done.
15,980 murders in 2001, when terrorists killed 2996 on 9-11
2996/15980 = 18.7%
https://archives.fbi.gov/archi...
I call BS on this one. Locking guests out of their rooms, sure. Locking guests into their rooms? Uh no. Basic fire code requires that all electronic locks always allow egress, regardless of their lock state or powered/unpowered. Basically, the mechanical locking mechanism can always be opened from the inside, regardless of how the electronic locks are hacked or malfunction.
Exactly this. It is a wonder how many are ignorant of basic science. (Well not really with the state of today's public education system.)
I will leave the discussion on liberals for another time, since what I describe has been exclusively my experience in dealing with them. There are exceptions to every rule, and maybe you are one, but the exceptions don't make (or break) the rule.
Regarding an armed conflict with China, you made my point. The US is not going to start a shooting war with China. The US is not in the business of starting wars, we react to defend ourselves and our allies. If China were to start a shooting war, it would end badly for them http://www.globalfirepower.com... as long as we don't run out of munitions (which I am pretty sure we will not). I ignored the fact that China would also be facing every NATO ally, as well as the JSDF locally http://www.globalfirepower.com... , and just about every other country in the Asian Pacific except for North Korea. The Chinese have been pissing off everyone around them with their attempted expansions in the South China Seas. The point I was making was that it is still in China's best interest to get along with the US, even though they may now have to play on an even playing field economically.
Muslim terrorists accounted for ~20% of all US murders in 2001. Sounds pretty damn statistically significant to me. And that was just one successful attack by less than 20 people. If you factor in the death rate for the age group killed (average age was 40) it was even more significant statistically. Just because they haven't been having much success in the US more recently doesn't mean they won't keep trying and it doesn't mean we need to import more terrorists.
The UN exists for this kind of thing and should have set up refugee camps long ago and still should to provide safe haven for the refugees. ISIS will leave armed, well positioned solders and civilians alone, or die quickly, especially when they are backed by the US military.
BTW, Obama banned the same Muslim countries in 2011 and no one lost their shit or protested.
https://sethfrantzman.com/2017...
Statistically, maybe. In reality, only if you are an idiot. So if you screen out all of the idiots doing dangerous things around their furniture (or living in earthquake zones with heavy, un-anchored furniture), then the odds go to zero... Meaning that no, your furniture is not more dangerous than terrorists. Care to try again?
The only thing being proved here is that there are many people who are bad at understanding statistics.
SJW mods, please note: disagreeing with my comments does not make the facts overrated or flamebait, and I am certainly not a troll. Feel free to scream into a pillow instead if you need to let off steam, but don't break the Slashdot mod system simply because you disagree with someone. You claim to be tolerant, live it.
Laws were based on the 10 commandments (it was illegal to murder, steal, commit adultery, tell a lie under oath, etc.) http://www.bibleinfo.com/en/to... While there were other contemporary and historical countries like England with similar laws, they still originate from the 10 commandments. And no Hamurabi's law is not the same thing (and it is actually unlikely that it was first, if you actually want to look at the facts rather than pointed headed professors pet theories aka wild ass guesses).
Here is a list of the founding fathers and their religious affiliations. http://www.adherents.com/gov/F... Notice that there are no Muslims, Atheists, Hindus, Buddhists etc. on that list. The men who wrote the constitution had at their core Judeo-Christian principles and those came through in the constitution. They appeal to God as the source of every person's basic rights in the Declaration of Independence for crying out loud. Everything was centered around ensuring people could live freely and practice Christianity which is why the first Amendment is about freedom of religion and speech. (Note that it is freedom of religion, not freedom from religion or separation of church and state, which does not exist in the constitution at all, the establishment clause only precludes the state from enforcing one religion on the populous).
Regardless of the revisionist BS history lies masquerading as "theories" that have been spread by the progressives as "facts", the truth is there if you are interested in looking, but you must be willing to listen instead of trying to drown out truth and reason with the sound of your own voice.
When asked over the years, I have always told potential employers that my value is based on my skillset and interpersonal skills. I ask that they make an offer based on the value that I will bring to their business, and that my past compensation is private and confidential. They typically don't like it in HR, but you get respect from the good managers. I have found that you get much higher offers than if you put down your past salary, where you get a ~5-10% higher offer than your past salary, rather than the true market rate for your skillset, which is typically higher.
OK, if you want to play the odds argument with me, MightyMartian. I have a bowl of 1000 chocolates for you to try. One of the chocolates is poisoned and will kill you in minutes with no antidote. Still want to eat any of the chocolates from my bowl? No, you most certainly will not, because while the risk is statistically low, it is an easily avoidable risk, and you can get non-poisoned candy just about anywhere. Yet here you are, making the argument to pour more candies into the bowl, even though you know that some of the new candies will be poisoned too. And you expect all of us, and our children to eat a few, with the argument being that the odds of anyone dying are pretty low... even though it is a nearly 100% certainty that some innocent people will die. It sounds pretty foolish when all the bleeding heart PC bullshit is stripped away doesn't it?
Also, just note that the highest lifetime or old age killers are heart disease and cancer, however, these are accepted and as of now unavoidable risks. Terrorists tend to kill preferentially people in their prime along with children. The impact on society of an old person dying of cancer is minimal and to a degree expected (we all have to die of something), while the death of a child or adult in their prime is far more disruptive and detrimental to individuals, families and society as a whole. Also, the mortality rate in those age brackets makes the chances of dying from terrorism exponentially larger, since very few children or 30 year old adults die of heart disease or cancer.
Beyond the simple statistics is the problem I allude to in my chocolates example. Terrorist attacks are a largely avoidable phenomena (check out Japan, they keep a close eye on their Muslim residents, including surveillance cameras in mosques and have had no terrorist attacks, BTW: funny no one shit a brick when Japan did this). To avoid Islamist terrorists, you must first realize that Islam practiced to the letter is violent and completely incompatible with the US laws and constitution, as well as American values and traditions. We allow freedom of religion up to the point where it violates the law. If your religion requires human sacrifice, and you kill someone in the practice of your religion, we sure as hell will hunt you down and prosecute you for committing murder. Many of the facets of Islam and Sharia law also violate basic laws in the US, up to and including honor killings, and killing the infidel and violent jihad, which are out and out murder.
We should do no less than any other nation and demand that all immigrants who come to America respect our laws and out beliefs, and if that is too much to ask of them, then they need to leave. We provide for freedom of religion, up to the point where that religion teaches treason, condones murder, mutilation and subjugation of women, slavery (and the list goes on).
The promise of freedom and prosperity that America offers comes at the price of requiring immigrants to become American, something that has almost been forgotten with all the multicultural BS. We are America, and we have our own culture. If your religion precludes you from adopting our beliefs, then I am sorry, but there is the door. America was founded on Judeo-Christian philosophy (sorry revisionists, you can suck it) and Islam played no part in our founding documents, no Muslim blood was shed to free us from oppression, and in fact, America's first armed conflict after gaining our independence was against Muslims (Barbary wars 1801-1816) who we had to go to war with because they were just as evil as the Islamists are today.
The US allows in more than 1,000,000 immigrants every year, more than any other country, but that doesn't mean we have to be stupid about it. There are plenty of people in line who do not ascribe to a worldview that is diametrically opposed to our beliefs.
Regarding the humanitarian crisis and refugees, it is much safer and more effective to set up safe zones in Iraq and Syria with UN soldiers from Muslim nati
"Oh really, is that what China is going to do? "Suck it up"? "
China's options:
Option1: suck it up, accept that fair trade still boosts their economy and live with a balanced trade ratio with the US
Option 2: start a trade war because the US is a less lucrative market that it was in the past, potentially lose $500B annually of their overseas market. Potentially lose over $1T in US debt that they hold.
Option 3: start a shooting war with the US. Face the most advanced military on the planet with 2000 nukes and 10 aircraft carrier groups and 14 nuclear equipped Trident II submarines. China brings 1 million soldiers, 200 nukes and 1 aircraft carrier and 4 nuclear ballistic missile subs. When Saddam invaded Kuwait, he had 1 million soldiers as well. It didn't take long for the US military to decimate them. China has been working hard for the last 8 years to steal our tech, because they know that numbers are virtually meaningless on today's battlefield.
"Really? It's Iran who is happy to set the fire? Not the newly-emboldened global policy "experts" who believe that diplomacy is "shut up and take it, cause we're 'murica?". "
The US policy for a long time was to uplift other countries by giving them deals that allowed for trade imbalance in their favor. With the end of the cold war, those policies should have ended, but they didn't. No other country on the planet would tolerate such imbalanced deals and the US no longer can either. Your attitude reveals your complete lack of experience or knowledge on the subject. I invite you to go and visit Iran, since you are so enlightened. Make sure to advocate your ideals while you are there, and spout off about various religions.
"Well, anyway, Mr. "LeftCoastThinker" I bet you've done well in your career and have many friends and personal successes. Your handle is great, because I am sure that you're the only smart person with all those dumb liberals there on the coast. LOL."
Fairly accurate in your assessment, although there are plenty of other smart people out here, the problem with liberals is not raw intelligence, it is emotional maturity and common sense. Typically exposure to the real world and the economy (working, getting laid off, having friends in law enforcement and the military, paying bills, paying taxes, running a business, etc.) tends to cure these over time, but these days there are many professions (along with welfare) that are immune to many of the above, (or create insulating, self re-enforcing echo chambers), leading to emotionally immature, ignorant sections of the population with a raging case of confirmation bias and ignorant pseudo-righteousness.
This exactly. And beyond that, who exactly is going to nuke who? Russia is happy with our new president. China may get pissed at him because the days of them screwing the US are over, but unless they want to write off $1,130,000,000,000 in US debt that they own, along with $500B/year of very lucrative trade with the US, they will suck it up. China is not stupid, they have 200 nukes, the US has 2,000.
The only real hazard right now is the 10 year clock that started when Iran signed the nuclear deal, which guarantees a terrorist fanatic regime nuclear capability in 10 years. Those crazy bastards want to watch the world burn and are happy to set the fire.
Having paid for everything as I went and gotten an AA from a junior college, BS from a 4 year, as well as MS and PhD and then teaching for 4 years as well as working in the private sector for 17 years, the entire college system is out of balance.
- JCs have become a second chance at high school for many students (I did it because I had to pay for everything myself, but saw the mentality first hand).
- 4 year state schools are filled with students who are distracted by constant partying and/or perfecting the art of the hookup.
- Post graduate education is essentially indentured servitude of degree holding adults who could be making $60k/year in the private sector teaching themselves and teaching undergrads because their professor hates teaching and wants to spend all of their time doing research.
We need to revamp our high schools similar to the way that Japan runs them, where if you screw off and get shit grades in junior high or high school, you get kicked out and have to go to vocational school to learn a trade (which can often be just as lucrative as a 4 year degree, but requires less brains). You don't get to go to college unless you get a diploma or a GED and maybe some minimum score on the SATs. This reduces the overcrowding at the university level, as well as the party mentality currently found there.
To reduce college costs, all student housing and meals should be run privately by lowest bidder every 3 years and pricing should be tied to market surveys for the city in which the university exists. i.e. if the average local 1 bedroom apartment costs $500/month and you have 3 roommates, you should only pay $125/month for housing. If the local sit down restaurant charges $4 for a Caesar salad, the college can't charge $9, especially for an inferior product (this happens and its ridiculous).
First and foremost we must force our colleges to refocus from BS PC agenda majors/GE requirements to the core goal of college: providing the tools for students to get jobs. GE requirements should be eliminated completely and each department every 3 years must be forced to show justification that they are creating professionals for actual job market needs and getting a 75% or higher placement rate in those fields, otherwise they no longer get any tax payer funding. Actual tuition should be 50% paid for by the state through taxes if you maintain a 3.0 or higher in a degree field that is profitable (when you apply for your college, you have to present a plan and a market study on the job market you are targeting when you graduate, how much you will make in 1-5-10 years and how much debt you will cary and when it will be paid off). The other 50% should be loans/grants out of pocket etc. However, since the tax payer is footing the bill for your degree, if your GPA drops below 3.0, you go on probation, and if you drop below 2.0, you get expelled and have to go to vocational school or get a job. Today, we have far too many people educated beyond their intelligence who can't understand why they can't get a job with their English/liberal arts/poli sci/Chicano studies/underwater basket weaving degree and are being crushed under mountains of student loan debt that they should never have taken on to begin with. Unless you are independently wealthy, you should be doing a cost benefit analysis to see if your degree is worth anything near what you are paying for it.
Sate run colleges should be focused on teaching and eliminate the practice of tenure. Professors who consistently score low in the quality of their students reviews and/or subsequent performance should go on probation and if not improved, termination. They should have a separate branch that is dedicated to research. If a professor can pull in enough grant money to cover his salary, (s)he can move over to the research branch and the college can hire a new professor to teach. Thus the professors who are teaching must be focused on teaching, and the professors focused on research can focus on their research. Students and graduates who want to work on research must be paid prevailing wage for their qualifications and they can get credits for working on the project.
OK, I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are genuinely ignorant and not just trying to be a troll. You do know that the US is a net exporter of oil right... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
The war in Afghanistan was because a few monsters over there murdered 3000 US civilians, and the ruling body in Afghanistan sided with those monsters, so we killed them. You remember that right? There is/was no oil in Afghanistan...
The war in Iraq happened because Saddam Hussein had a huge stockpile of chemical weapons (previously well documented in the 80s and previously used on the Kurds in 1988 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared... ) and had Uranium (550 tons http://www.nbcnews.com/id/2554...), was trying to buy more and refine it (we found the centrifuges buried in a civilian district of Baghdad http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/... ) and he kicked the IAEA/weapons inspectors out of Iraq. He thought we would blink because we were already involved in Afghanistan, but we didn't and that was what triggered the Iraq war.
We didn't take over any Iraq oil fields and we don't import it. We spent $2,000B on the Iraq war http://www.reuters.com/article... while the Iraq oil production is worth a piddling $25B/year. http://www.theglobalist.com/ir... If you think the Iraq war was about oil or for profit, you are either ignorant or a moron or both.
We need the US war machine so that the Russians and/or the Chinese (or Iran for that mater), don't try to subjugate the rest of the world. I suspect under Trump, a lot of other modern countries who have been getting a free ride as far as protection via the US military will start shouldering their fair share of expenses, so we may well have more cash, but that will probably go to actually building things like power plants, transmission lines, roads and airports, rather than more "green jobs." We already tried that under BHO and we got Solyndra. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
This largely depends on how the survey was worded. I am all for developing alternative energy sources, but I am also realistic about how feasible and financially viable it is. Right now there are a few criteria that need to be met for US power needs:
1. The power must be economically competitive with existing sources. Current solar PV arrays are about on par with natural gas turbines.
2. Power available as it is needed 24/7/365. This is the difficulty that comes with solar PV, wind etc.
If tomorrow someone perfects the ultra high capacity liquid metal battery http://news.mit.edu/2016/batte... or some other way to efficiently store massive amounts of energy efficiently then solar and wind and other alternative power sources become grid wide viable options for baseline generation. As it is, no renewable power source works reliably when the sun goes down/wind randomly stops blowing. I have over 5kW of solar panels myself, because it made financial sense and paid for it'self within about 10 years.
This exactly. The CEO on down the chain to the individual employees who facilitated fraud need to be charged with felony wire fraud and face 10 years in the federal pen. On top of this, Western Union should be required to provide a full refund to every fraudulent transaction that they facilitated to the victims since their employees were helping facilitate the fraud. If it were truly 1 in 100,000 as they claim, they should be able to absorb the costs easily. If this bankrupts them, tough shit, don't let your employees perpetrate fraud.
If you have a president who is a leader (not a spoiled child) they are typically the leader of their party, and they set much of the legislative agenda. Bush inherited a recession (dot com bubble) from Clinton and then had 9-11. His hands were full. Beyond that, Bush was a conservative, and copyright is good for businesses, thus he was not going to shorten it. Obama, on the other hand, purported to be for the people, aka. a populist, but contrary to his rhetoric, he did jack shit on out of control patents and copyright. Trump is now president, and he is a true populist (what Obama claimed to be). Just today he killed TPP, as Obama should have done a long time ago. People have to stop looking at the D or R after someone's name and pay attention to what they are doing.
Well, there's great news for this guy. In a few years, autonomous cars will eliminate the need for drivers, and this guy won't have a car to sleep in, or an income at all. The moral to this story is if you want to make a good living, get a marketable skill that takes some skill to develop and is in demand. Since virtually every adult in the US can drive, driving services were never going to be a cash cow. Machinist, electrician, elevator repair, commercial equipment service and repair, etc. are the way to go. To a certain degree, this is the sad result of not teaching even one class in high school on basic applied economics (supply and demand, markets etc.)
Based on this response, I'm 95% sure that it was Samsung that did not allow enough space for the battery to expand under load in the battery bay of the phone. The battery case is typically not strong enough to compress the battery as it expands, intentionally. Given the fact that the Samsung CEO is looking at bribery charges and how they handled the failures and recall in the first place, I don't trust Samsung as far as I can throw them without a lot more detail than what was provided today.
The fact that they acknowledge that the first round of failures was not enough room for the battery to expand (but blame it on a paper thin battery case, rather than their much thicker and more rigid phone structure), and fail to describe what the failure mode was for the replacement batteries, (just calling it a manufacturing defect) leads me to believe that both failures were Samsung's fault for not allowing enough expansion space for the battery to expand in the battery bay. It will be informative when the lawsuits go through discovery to see what they can find. (Unless Samsung just buys them off.) The smoking gun will probably come from the battery manufacturers recommended expansion volumes vs what the Note actually had in terms of battery bay space.
TLDR: Some dude figures out that video recording someone entering their password lets you figure out the password...