In other words, the pilot-in-command in on the aircraft and in full control. However, should he and the flight crew become dis-abled (say, due to hijacking), ground control can take over the aircraft. This can either be based upon the pilot signaling ground control, or ground control noticing that the aircraft has deviated significantly from it's flight plan (and say, heading straight for a building).
Not to take over for the pilot, but I can see it's potential as a safety.
"History is rife with examples of corporate special interests skewing research about their products through carefully chosen grants and commissioned studies. Lead, Tobacco, DDT, Oil; hell,...."
Why do we have to bring Microsoft into it everytime somebody mentions "big corporations"?
This thing was clearly superior to Windows, and had a fanatical user base. Yet, IBM pretty much left us with no support. There idea of porting an app to OS/2 was to slap a sticker on a Win 3.1 app saying it will run in emulation on OS/2.
Eventually, I had to realize that, if the developers of OS/2 won't support it, there is not point to me doing so. I un-installed it, put Windows back on, boxed up what I had of OS/2 Warp, and threw the whole shebang in the nearest dumpster.
They really had something there...and they just let it die.
I believe that Republicans vote Republican and Democrats vote Democrat....the campaign managers know this and they have a pretty good idea of how many of each demographic they have to work with. So, their job isn't to try and convince you who to vote for, you've already decided that. Their job is to get you into the polls so you can actually cast that vote.
Somewhere along the line, they decided that the best motivator was to get you pissed off enough at the other guy that you would make the time to get into the polls.
Unfortunately, this has caused campaigns to go from "vote for me because" to "don't vote for the other guy because".
Oddly enough, I've been getting a bunch of calls supporting our incumbant Republican senator....so many were coming in that I was wondering if it was actually a ploy from the Democrates to get me annoyed and blame the Republicans. However, the only smearing was against the Democrats. Still, what possible marketing model says that the way to get votes is to repeatedly harass potential voters by phone?.
The phrase "out of touch" comes to mind....BTW - I'm a registered independant, and thinking of going Libertarian.
Although, on first pass, it comes off as a bit "condescending" even "acrimonious". I mean seriously, statements such as, "go look it up....we'll wait..." kinda leave me with the impression that this is one of those maniacal "ranting and raving" sites such as "forces.org". {go ahead....look it up...I'll wait -- *sorry, couldn't resist*}.
Then again, sometimes the lunatics have a point, I'll follow up as best I can with the material presented.
Each name is associated with one article. Those articles are embedded in hyperlinks that are now being distributed widely among the left-leaning blogosphere. In an entry at MyDD.com this week, Mr. Bowers said: "When you discuss any of these races in the future, please, use the same embedded hyperlink when reprinting the Republican's name. Then, I suppose, we will see what happens."
That's a pretty coordinated effort, but I guess that's politics.
If you pay peanuts, you get elephants...you only get monkeys if you're willing to shell out some serious banannas. Rabbits can be had if you're willing to come up with the lettuce and, if you've got the cheese, you'll attract the mice - who will scare away the elephants you only paid peanuts for in the first place.
On the other hand, if I need to get rid of an ass, I'll just tie a carrot to a stick and lead him away.
I think you are confusing categorization with restriction.
As for it not being a perfect solution....conceeded...but it would help enough to be worth it. Finally, it is my understanding that most porn sites want the.xxx domain because it makes it easier to filter. Many of these site have links to NetNanny, et. al. on thier cover page.
What remains are a whole slew of other site that still require adult supervision....but what doesn't.
I support the.xxx domain because it makes it easier to filter harmful content from my children....I stand by my original post.
This can be a problem. For example, I won't be able to check out the actual demo until I get home because I don't know what image it may pull to my work desktop.
For those of us that run xscreensaver, one of the hacks goes out and gets random images from the web. I had to turn that one off because, random or not, it was getting porn everytime it ran. Now, I'm not a prude, I'm not concerned if my 5 year old son sees the image of a naked woman on my computer screen. To have a problem with that is to have a problem with the human body and I'm not going there. However, if said naked woman is in the process of strapping on a rubber penis....well....that's a bit hard to explain. Alternatively, if it's an image of a person (male or female) being abused....you get the idea.
This leads in to why I support the idea of.xxx domains. If you want access to it, fine with me. All I ask is that you make it easy for me to discriminate what my kids are exposed to. I want them to be able to use the internet and me to not have to worry about what they might find.
Unfortuantely, I gave up modding this thread to ask a question but I'm sure the parent will be modded to oblivion anyways. So, I'll ask another one. What is it about Slashdot that attracts links to that particular site? I frequent several other sites where you can post comments...including FARK, and this is the only place I see these links.
What is the connection here? What is the fascination with trying to lure people into seeing these pictures? If blocking a controversial image is censorship, then luring some unsuspecting person into viewing that image is the other side of that coin...and just as bad.
It was amazing, the guy just set it in motion and sat back down. Whole thing was animated, backgound music, transparent lettering that floated in front of the slides as they appeared. He never said a word, just let this thing run.
In the end, it was eye-candy but no substance. Being the smart-ass that I am, I made the comment to the guy sitting next to me (in a low and very dead-pan tone), "wow...he's got some mad powerpoint skills".
Ya know when you're in those situations where you have to be quiet?...and someone makes you laugh?....and you try to stifle that laugh only to have it come out as a snort, which is even worse?
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, the pilot-in-command in on the aircraft and in full control. However, should he and the flight crew become dis-abled (say, due to hijacking), ground control can take over the aircraft. This can either be based upon the pilot signaling ground control, or ground control noticing that the aircraft has deviated significantly from it's flight plan (and say, heading straight for a building).
Not to take over for the pilot, but I can see it's potential as a safety.
Yes, I knew somebody would point that out....
from the parent post:
"History is rife with examples of corporate special interests skewing research about their products through carefully chosen grants and commissioned studies. Lead, Tobacco, DDT, Oil; hell,...."
Why do we have to bring Microsoft into it everytime somebody mentions "big corporations"?
This thing was clearly superior to Windows, and had a fanatical user base. Yet, IBM pretty much left us with no support. There idea of porting an app to OS/2 was to slap a sticker on a Win 3.1 app saying it will run in emulation on OS/2.
Eventually, I had to realize that, if the developers of OS/2 won't support it, there is not point to me doing so. I un-installed it, put Windows back on, boxed up what I had of OS/2 Warp, and threw the whole shebang in the nearest dumpster.
They really had something there...and they just let it die.
actually called an "Air Biscut"....never heard it described as a planet before, but, I suppose if it really were that colassal....
:)
YOU INSENSITIVE CLOD!!!
Until then...I ain't never seen and elephant fly! {...sniff...}
I believe that Republicans vote Republican and Democrats vote Democrat....the campaign managers know this and they have a pretty good idea of how many of each demographic they have to work with. So, their job isn't to try and convince you who to vote for, you've already decided that. Their job is to get you into the polls so you can actually cast that vote.
Somewhere along the line, they decided that the best motivator was to get you pissed off enough at the other guy that you would make the time to get into the polls.
Unfortunately, this has caused campaigns to go from "vote for me because" to "don't vote for the other guy because".
It just seems to get worse with time.
Oddly enough, I've been getting a bunch of calls supporting our incumbant Republican senator....so many were coming in that I was wondering if it was actually a ploy from the Democrates to get me annoyed and blame the Republicans. However, the only smearing was against the Democrats. Still, what possible marketing model says that the way to get votes is to repeatedly harass potential voters by phone?.
The phrase "out of touch" comes to mind....BTW - I'm a registered independant, and thinking of going Libertarian.
Although, on first pass, it comes off as a bit "condescending" even "acrimonious". I mean seriously, statements such as, "go look it up....we'll wait..." kinda leave me with the impression that this is one of those maniacal "ranting and raving" sites such as "forces.org". {go ahead....look it up...I'll wait -- *sorry, couldn't resist*}.
Then again, sometimes the lunatics have a point, I'll follow up as best I can with the material presented.
been oddly unsuccessful....no doubt thanks to the dilligent efforts of those in the CIA trying to keep WMD data from the terrorist.
A good leader is not generally going to know everything, but he should be smart enough to surround himself with people who can fill in the gaps.
FTFA:
Each name is associated with one article. Those articles are embedded in hyperlinks that are now being distributed widely among the left-leaning blogosphere. In an entry at MyDD.com this week, Mr. Bowers said: "When you discuss any of these races in the future, please, use the same embedded hyperlink when reprinting the Republican's name. Then, I suppose, we will see what happens."
That's a pretty coordinated effort, but I guess that's politics.
How do you go about gaming Google's search engine to insure that searches for a specific politician are more likely to find negative stories?
If you pay peanuts, you get elephants...you only get monkeys if you're willing to shell out some serious banannas. Rabbits can be had if you're willing to come up with the lettuce and, if you've got the cheese, you'll attract the mice - who will scare away the elephants you only paid peanuts for in the first place.
On the other hand, if I need to get rid of an ass, I'll just tie a carrot to a stick and lead him away.
Last place I worked, my cubie was right in the crossfire of a major skirmish most of the time.
h at-shoots-rubber-bands/
http://www.ohgizmo.com/2006/01/19/a-gatling-gun-t
Another near disaster has been averted! Thank you AC-man! Thank you!
One thing that can make a response look like political banner waving is simply presenting unsubstantiated statements as fact. To-wit...
_ myths.htm
"First, the ozone hole opens and closes each year- it doesn't just sit there gaping open. Its part of a natural cycle."
Says who? also, I think the article indicated this particular event as an anomoly, are you refuting that?
"Second, even evolutionistic meteorologists deny the theory (THEORY mind you) of global warming."
Got a name for us? Most of the studies I've read would indicate the exact opposite of that statement.
But ya know, I just googled "global warming myth" and found this little gem:
http://www.environmentaldefense.org/documents/382
people who sell talcum powder might just have a new market...followed by paintball gun manufacturers.
I think you are confusing categorization with restriction.
.xxx domain because it makes it easier to filter. Many of these site have links to NetNanny, et. al. on thier cover page.
.xxx domain because it makes it easier to filter harmful content from my children....I stand by my original post.
As for it not being a perfect solution....conceeded...but it would help enough to be worth it. Finally, it is my understanding that most porn sites want the
What remains are a whole slew of other site that still require adult supervision....but what doesn't.
I support the
This can be a problem. For example, I won't be able to check out the actual demo until I get home because I don't know what image it may pull to my work desktop.
.xxx domains. If you want access to it, fine with me. All I ask is that you make it easy for me to discriminate what my kids are exposed to. I want them to be able to use the internet and me to not have to worry about what they might find.
For those of us that run xscreensaver, one of the hacks goes out and gets random images from the web. I had to turn that one off because, random or not, it was getting porn everytime it ran. Now, I'm not a prude, I'm not concerned if my 5 year old son sees the image of a naked woman on my computer screen. To have a problem with that is to have a problem with the human body and I'm not going there. However, if said naked woman is in the process of strapping on a rubber penis....well....that's a bit hard to explain. Alternatively, if it's an image of a person (male or female) being abused....you get the idea.
This leads in to why I support the idea of
Unfortuantely, I gave up modding this thread to ask a question but I'm sure the parent will be modded to oblivion anyways. So, I'll ask another one. What is it about Slashdot that attracts links to that particular site? I frequent several other sites where you can post comments...including FARK, and this is the only place I see these links.
What is the connection here? What is the fascination with trying to lure people into seeing these pictures? If blocking a controversial image is censorship, then luring some unsuspecting person into viewing that image is the other side of that coin...and just as bad.
This may well be modded "off topic" but I'm curious nonetheless.
Albert Wang (ABS/Newegg)
Is he related to the old Wang computers? Perhaps some of you remember the old joke:
Q: "What were the first two computers?"
A: "Eve had an Apple and Adam had a Wang"
Seeing as Slashdot is loaded with computer engineers, I figure one of you might know.
It was Burlesque Shows :)
yesterday.
It was amazing, the guy just set it in motion and sat back down. Whole thing was animated, backgound music, transparent lettering that floated in front of the slides as they appeared. He never said a word, just let this thing run.
In the end, it was eye-candy but no substance. Being the smart-ass that I am, I made the comment to the guy sitting next to me (in a low and very dead-pan tone), "wow...he's got some mad powerpoint skills".
Ya know when you're in those situations where you have to be quiet?...and someone makes you laugh?....and you try to stifle that laugh only to have it come out as a snort, which is even worse?
Yea, I didn't make a friend that day...