I read all the tech pundit blogs of course. They tell me how it's all an illusion that linux boxes are cheaper and more stable, and how Apple's aren't any more secure than windows, only ignored by hackers.
My linux laptop is all crudded up with 9000 spyware bonzi buddy applets, and my OSX work machine was just discovered to be a spam zombie spewing out half a billion UBE's per week.
Bad, Apple, bad. *thwacks Apple with rolled up newspaper*
Don't break any fixes anymore, you're supposed to be perfect.
It appears more that Microsoft is trying to take their time and putting in extra effort to make this release literally the best Windows release to date, because the last thing they want is another Windows ME. This process applies to any software group, be it OSS, Apple, IBM, and yes, Microsoft.
My apologies if the above is sarcasm, but I can't tell. If it is, it is the smoothest, most subtle example I have ever laid eyes upon. But, if not...
And yet this reaction, taken to its extreme conclusion, gives the assholes a mandate to do whatever they want to the environment without even the tiniest bit of oversight.
Which is pointless. The cause doesn't matter, only whether we can solve it. But conservatives are too retarded to see this, and get pissed if someone makes them think up a better excuse.
Funny, how each side screams about media bias. Rush is certain that there are hippies hiding in the newsroom, and Moore is sure that there are cigar-chomping robber barons behind the teleprompter.
When will people wake up and realize that it's a show put on for our benefit, to distract us? Those are handpuppets squabbling, and the same person is doing the puppeteering for both.
I don't know the exact mechanism, but it might be something like this:
Stupid people make up the vast majority of any given set of people. They're of no use in solving important problems. This makes them feel guilty. To try to rid themselves of being useless, they will blame the problem on something else (even if they aren't the actual blameworthy person). Pointing out that blaming is useless and counter-productive causes they're ill-considered strategy to (potentially) backfire, and so they attack whoever mentions this.
The tone of all such conversations always boils down to "oh god, let's jackoff Gore, he's our savior", or in other forums "he's trying to steal my god-given coal power plant profits!". Nothing of substance can ever come to light.
You say that Al Gore is most assuredly a bad person because he is a politician. That's a load of crock. Why that's just as bad as saying that if a man's a Jew...or African-American...
Let's see. One of the worst things that people did during slavery, and later during the segregation era, was to imply that... based solely on their skin color... that blacks were somehow mentally and morally inferior. Odd logic that.
Me, on the other hand, I'm saying that politicians (an occupation chosen completely voluntarily) are mentally and morally inferior. I do not see how this makes me "racist". (Occupationist?) At what percentage does it become unfair to generalize? Ethical lapses aren't just common, they're a given. If you see a man sitting there eating turds and howling at the moon, it is fair to think that he's insane (it's also fair to think that he'd make a better congressman than any we've seen in decades). If many men start following him, and acting like him, calling themselves Shiteaters with a capital S, can we not say they're insane too, even if we don't personally witness them gobbling toilet loafs? It's the same with politicians, except that I'd much rather have the lunatic for a son-in-law. I'd have to disown a daughter that married a politician.
But enough fun trolling. People are wired to react to charismatic/leader-like behavior. This is responsible for putting a man in office. Never was a man elected because he had good ideas, or better ideas about how to implement the things we need. Not because he's a good problem solver, or even because he recognizes and surrounds himself with those that are. Some might call me a young man yet, and I learned this rather quickly. Dare say it was obvious to me before I was in highschool. Why don't you recognize it? Some compulsion towards unwarranted optimism? Is it a pet cause in common with Gore, and you project your own good intentions onto him when he doesn't deserve it? Or maybe the emotional investment in being right about him... would be difficult to admit to yourself that maybe he's not such a great guy after all, and change the opinion you've held for months and years. And here's the thing. You've been exposed to others who sound sorta like I do, say some of the same things. And then there's the sales pitch. Maybe they're religious, and trying to sell Jeebus at this point, or a diametrically opposed political candidate. But they try to sell you something.
I'm not.
They're all pieces of shit, and the world would be better off without them. Pinko liberal democrats and centrist democrats, and republicans, and reagan republicans, and neo-conservatives. The numerous fringe candidates who call themselves communists or progressives or libertarians. They can all go to hell.
And, if I'm even slightly better than they are, it's because I'd refuse to hold public office. Not that I say I am, nor do I think I'd ever have a chance at it. I'd rather be a farmer, or a father, or any of a thousand other things more wholesome. The greed for presitge and power is in many ways worse than the greed for money.
The environment is not just a ploy.
For him it is. I've never disputed the possibility that there's a climate disaster looming, or that humanity is responsible for it. But if there wasn't, he'd pick another one. Hell, he might have several in the waiting that he's cultivated all along, I don't keep up with the hobbies of these assholes. If aliens landed tomorrow and fixed it for us with magic, I have zero doubt in my mind that he'd have another crusade ready to go, and a press conference scheduled.
Dude, the man's gone on record as saying he will not be a candidate for President again.
Your reading comprehension isn't so high. I would take the cheap shot and suggest that it's because you're stupid, but more likely you were busy being enraged at someone blaspheming your savior. I pointed out that though he wasn't running, this does not mean in any significant way that he has divorced himself f
In truth, I'm a filthy (and only minimally successful) troll. Thanks for playing.
Non-trolling: Intuitively, it seems that windmills and (current technology) solar can't even be successful as stopgap solutions, let alone long-term. Also, intuitively, it seems that outside of ideal locations, windmills would take many decades to break even and many never would. I have nothing to back this up, but neither will I necessarily believe numbers to the contrary... there's alot of propaganda coming from both sides.
If you knew what Al Gore has done, and the causes he has championed
The causes he has championed? He has enthusiastically embraced a life of elitism, and even worse, of politics. If more is needed to condemn a man to tell, I know not what.
that this whole environment isn't some political ploy for him
It is. It always is. What you find appealing in his image, you mistake for sincerity. There might be real sincerity behind that characteristic that fills some hunger in your soul, but even sincerity counts for shit in my book... too many ijits who are sincere, but wrong.
that the man isn't interested in politics anymore
Really. Wonder what you'd call it then. But it's funny you claim I'm the brainless one, yet you confuse the lack of another presidential bid as uninvolvement in politics. The man would die in a world that had no place for politics, he knows little else of use.
Furthermore, it does matter if it's natural or caused by man because if it is caused by man, then we not only need to solve the problem of returning global temperatures to "normal" but we also have to fix our habits so that this will not happen again.
So, your logic is that it is important, despite the possibility that the world will be wrecked for human habitation either way? Strange. Either way, if it is happening, seems we need to fix it.
Additionally, not only you and others like you be paying for this, but assholes like him will as well.
Percentage of corporate revenue used for employee wages went up on his watch, as it had with every president since the 60s. Some are more equal than others.
I don't think anything you said had any redeeming value except to remind me of the very reason I am afraid of becoming stupid.
It heartens me to know few agree with me. So far from populat opinion, I have at least a chance of being correct.
Gore still doesn't get to score points. So he has a few bandwagons he nurtures, waiting to see which takes off.
I say we shoot all the politicians (democrat and republican alike), and burn their corpses as fuel. Will that improve the climate, or make it worse?
Re:Nothing inconvenient about the results
on
An Inconvenient Truth
·
· Score: -1, Troll
I've heard from some bible-thumpers and neocons suggest that even if the temperature is rising, it may be a natural phenomenon. It might be at that. Who really gives a fuck though? If it is natural, and we can still beat it by changing our technology, seems like a no-brainer to me.
But, thanks for reading my comment all wrong, dickhead. I just love it... you prove my point perfectly. Gore is some type of mystical savior to you. I think monkeys always act like this to the alpha male or something.
Why not have the browser fail to render them outside of the user's preferred alphabet?
Cyrillic users would see www.**c******.com, latin users would see www.mi*rosoft.com?
Or better yet, put up a big warning that it's using mixed alphabets?
Re:Nothing inconvenient about the results
on
An Inconvenient Truth
·
· Score: 1, Insightful
Regardless of the truth of the matter.
Al Gore comes across as a politician looking for the bandwagon of all bandwagons to jump on. He knows he needs one to go down in the history books as more than a footnote, but even the most green (forgive the pun) politician knows that to jump on a bandwagon you have to be *sure* of it. And, since the man is a fool, he chose this one. Oh, don't get me wrong, it is possible that global warming is real, and a real problem... but this is like the idiot who has a system for predicting lottery numbers... one lucky hit, and now he's convinced that the system works.
Even when politicians are correct, they're still politicians. And it's far more dangerous to start believing in them than it is for the average temperature to go up 2 degrees over the next century.
On the subject of global warming... I remain unconvinced for now, but I haven't ruled it out either. I am considering investing in some beachfront property in Iowa. But the thing that gets me, is whether or not it's natural or caused by man... who gives a fuck? If it's natural, it's still a disaster and maybe one we can avoid. Why are there so many bullshit arguments from both sides? And how come if Gore gets his way, me and others like me are going to be the ones paying for it, while assholes like him fly around to global warming awareness rallies in big jets that gulp thousands of gallons of jet fuel per trip?
So, one of those little single home jobs will generate enough energy to have smelted it's own steel, and powered the mining equipment to mine its own copper for the motor windings?
How about the plastic or fiberglass blades?
We need nuke plants. Preferably fusion instead of the "make everything glow in the dark and the livestock gets sickly and die" variety.
Depends on the location, of course. Most aren't suited for it. Including only those locations suitable would at most support 5% or so of our current power consumption, let alone projected growth curves.
The windmill on every rooftop thing...
Re:Does any major site use pure CSS?
on
CSS Cookbook
·
· Score: 0
Yes. And people in third world countries defecate in open latrines. Please do not do that either. But if you must do one of these two things, shit out in the open field, it's only slightly smellier, and will go away far faster than a tables-based-layout.
This is dumb. Enough cheap energy, and yes you can.
I get pissed at the fools always talking about a looming water crisis. Bullshit... we have an energy crisis. Get enough of that, and desalinization is trivial. Same thing here.
Because windmills typically only produce something on the order of 85% of the energy needed to make them in the first place within their own lifetimes?
Windmills have their uses, but they won't solve any of our major problems. You're the wife who just learned hubby was laid off and thinks that clipping a few $1 coupons will be enough... the mortgage is $2000 a month.
Songs of Earth and Power is one of my favorite fantasies, the first even. Only Tad Williams even comes close. Fred Saberhagen's Empire of the East would be the distant third.
I said: I can open up an.swf in notepad and see the source?
You claimed: No, but that question is irrelevant for the vast majority of end-users.
But originally you had said...
Aside from the video codecs--...--Flash is just as open as SVG
So, you're wrong on two counts. One is being fallacious in bring up the vast-majority of end-users, who don't care about open source/standards in the first place. The second, is denying that plain-text-readability is unimportant in the context of this conversation, which is whether flash is as open as anything else.
No, but again, why does it matter if you can? Again, this might be a cute idea for a hobbyist
No, actually there are many professional web developers that would appreciate being able to create an inline vector here or there, since it's a better solution than putting in a raster that can weigh 10 times as much.
Sure. But for some odd reason, it seems like all the capable programmers have better things to do.
Dead wrong. Anyone attempting to write an open-source (or any other license, for that matter) flash player would have ravenous flesh-eating lawyers sicced on them. This isn't opinion on my part, but Macromedia's policy on the subject, which has most assuredly been inherited by Adobe (a company that was never lawyer-shy themselves).
So, once again, please tell me how in any single way flash might be "open". Doesn't even have to be "as open" as SVG, just one tiny detail. Please. It's not. It is as closed and proprietary as anything ever has been, and quite a bit more than some other software that we've ranted about.
And notice, I didn't even mention any of its other flaws, which constitute a countless horde ready to destroy the web and replace it with "LOADING..." blinkers.
Slashdot Mirror
Even broken clocks...
I read all the tech pundit blogs of course. They tell me how it's all an illusion that linux boxes are cheaper and more stable, and how Apple's aren't any more secure than windows, only ignored by hackers.
All 3 of them?
My linux laptop is all crudded up with 9000 spyware bonzi buddy applets, and my OSX work machine was just discovered to be a spam zombie spewing out half a billion UBE's per week.
Bad, Apple, bad. *thwacks Apple with rolled up newspaper*
Don't break any fixes anymore, you're supposed to be perfect.
It appears more that Microsoft is trying to take their time and putting in extra effort to make this release literally the best Windows release to date, because the last thing they want is another Windows ME. This process applies to any software group, be it OSS, Apple, IBM, and yes, Microsoft.
My apologies if the above is sarcasm, but I can't tell. If it is, it is the smoothest, most subtle example I have ever laid eyes upon. But, if not...
Are you on drugs?
Artificial languages are considered property. Paramount owns klingon, for instance.
And yet this reaction, taken to its extreme conclusion, gives the assholes a mandate to do whatever they want to the environment without even the tiniest bit of oversight.
There was a wolf for real, eventually.
Which is pointless. The cause doesn't matter, only whether we can solve it. But conservatives are too retarded to see this, and get pissed if someone makes them think up a better excuse.
Funny, how each side screams about media bias. Rush is certain that there are hippies hiding in the newsroom, and Moore is sure that there are cigar-chomping robber barons behind the teleprompter.
When will people wake up and realize that it's a show put on for our benefit, to distract us? Those are handpuppets squabbling, and the same person is doing the puppeteering for both.
I don't know the exact mechanism, but it might be something like this:
Stupid people make up the vast majority of any given set of people. They're of no use in solving important problems. This makes them feel guilty. To try to rid themselves of being useless, they will blame the problem on something else (even if they aren't the actual blameworthy person). Pointing out that blaming is useless and counter-productive causes they're ill-considered strategy to (potentially) backfire, and so they attack whoever mentions this.
The tone of all such conversations always boils down to "oh god, let's jackoff Gore, he's our savior", or in other forums "he's trying to steal my god-given coal power plant profits!". Nothing of substance can ever come to light.
You say that Al Gore is most assuredly a bad person because he is a politician. That's a load of crock. Why that's just as bad as saying that if a man's a Jew...or African-American...
Let's see. One of the worst things that people did during slavery, and later during the segregation era, was to imply that... based solely on their skin color... that blacks were somehow mentally and morally inferior. Odd logic that.
Me, on the other hand, I'm saying that politicians (an occupation chosen completely voluntarily) are mentally and morally inferior. I do not see how this makes me "racist". (Occupationist?) At what percentage does it become unfair to generalize? Ethical lapses aren't just common, they're a given. If you see a man sitting there eating turds and howling at the moon, it is fair to think that he's insane (it's also fair to think that he'd make a better congressman than any we've seen in decades). If many men start following him, and acting like him, calling themselves Shiteaters with a capital S, can we not say they're insane too, even if we don't personally witness them gobbling toilet loafs? It's the same with politicians, except that I'd much rather have the lunatic for a son-in-law. I'd have to disown a daughter that married a politician.
But enough fun trolling. People are wired to react to charismatic/leader-like behavior. This is responsible for putting a man in office. Never was a man elected because he had good ideas, or better ideas about how to implement the things we need. Not because he's a good problem solver, or even because he recognizes and surrounds himself with those that are. Some might call me a young man yet, and I learned this rather quickly. Dare say it was obvious to me before I was in highschool. Why don't you recognize it? Some compulsion towards unwarranted optimism? Is it a pet cause in common with Gore, and you project your own good intentions onto him when he doesn't deserve it? Or maybe the emotional investment in being right about him... would be difficult to admit to yourself that maybe he's not such a great guy after all, and change the opinion you've held for months and years. And here's the thing. You've been exposed to others who sound sorta like I do, say some of the same things. And then there's the sales pitch. Maybe they're religious, and trying to sell Jeebus at this point, or a diametrically opposed political candidate. But they try to sell you something.
I'm not.
They're all pieces of shit, and the world would be better off without them. Pinko liberal democrats and centrist democrats, and republicans, and reagan republicans, and neo-conservatives. The numerous fringe candidates who call themselves communists or progressives or libertarians. They can all go to hell.
And, if I'm even slightly better than they are, it's because I'd refuse to hold public office. Not that I say I am, nor do I think I'd ever have a chance at it. I'd rather be a farmer, or a father, or any of a thousand other things more wholesome. The greed for presitge and power is in many ways worse than the greed for money.
The environment is not just a ploy.
For him it is. I've never disputed the possibility that there's a climate disaster looming, or that humanity is responsible for it. But if there wasn't, he'd pick another one. Hell, he might have several in the waiting that he's cultivated all along, I don't keep up with the hobbies of these assholes. If aliens landed tomorrow and fixed it for us with magic, I have zero doubt in my mind that he'd have another crusade ready to go, and a press conference scheduled.
Dude, the man's gone on record as saying he will not be a candidate for President again.
Your reading comprehension isn't so high. I would take the cheap shot and suggest that it's because you're stupid, but more likely you were busy being enraged at someone blaspheming your savior. I pointed out that though he wasn't running, this does not mean in any significant way that he has divorced himself f
In truth, I'm a filthy (and only minimally successful) troll. Thanks for playing.
Non-trolling: Intuitively, it seems that windmills and (current technology) solar can't even be successful as stopgap solutions, let alone long-term. Also, intuitively, it seems that outside of ideal locations, windmills would take many decades to break even and many never would. I have nothing to back this up, but neither will I necessarily believe numbers to the contrary... there's alot of propaganda coming from both sides.
the brains to made up your mind.
No further comment necessary.
If you knew what Al Gore has done, and the causes he has championed
The causes he has championed? He has enthusiastically embraced a life of elitism, and even worse, of politics. If more is needed to condemn a man to tell, I know not what.
that this whole environment isn't some political ploy for him
It is. It always is. What you find appealing in his image, you mistake for sincerity. There might be real sincerity behind that characteristic that fills some hunger in your soul, but even sincerity counts for shit in my book... too many ijits who are sincere, but wrong.
that the man isn't interested in politics anymore
Really. Wonder what you'd call it then. But it's funny you claim I'm the brainless one, yet you confuse the lack of another presidential bid as uninvolvement in politics. The man would die in a world that had no place for politics, he knows little else of use.
Furthermore, it does matter if it's natural or caused by man because if it is caused by man, then we not only need to solve the problem of returning global temperatures to "normal" but we also have to fix our habits so that this will not happen again.
So, your logic is that it is important, despite the possibility that the world will be wrecked for human habitation either way? Strange. Either way, if it is happening, seems we need to fix it.
Additionally, not only you and others like you be paying for this, but assholes like him will as well.
Percentage of corporate revenue used for employee wages went up on his watch, as it had with every president since the 60s. Some are more equal than others.
I don't think anything you said had any redeeming value except to remind me of the very reason I am afraid of becoming stupid.
It heartens me to know few agree with me. So far from populat opinion, I have at least a chance of being correct.
Gore still doesn't get to score points. So he has a few bandwagons he nurtures, waiting to see which takes off.
I say we shoot all the politicians (democrat and republican alike), and burn their corpses as fuel. Will that improve the climate, or make it worse?
I've heard from some bible-thumpers and neocons suggest that even if the temperature is rising, it may be a natural phenomenon. It might be at that. Who really gives a fuck though? If it is natural, and we can still beat it by changing our technology, seems like a no-brainer to me.
But, thanks for reading my comment all wrong, dickhead. I just love it... you prove my point perfectly. Gore is some type of mystical savior to you. I think monkeys always act like this to the alpha male or something.
Why not have the browser fail to render them outside of the user's preferred alphabet?
Cyrillic users would see www.**c******.com, latin users would see www.mi*rosoft.com?
Or better yet, put up a big warning that it's using mixed alphabets?
Regardless of the truth of the matter.
Al Gore comes across as a politician looking for the bandwagon of all bandwagons to jump on. He knows he needs one to go down in the history books as more than a footnote, but even the most green (forgive the pun) politician knows that to jump on a bandwagon you have to be *sure* of it. And, since the man is a fool, he chose this one. Oh, don't get me wrong, it is possible that global warming is real, and a real problem... but this is like the idiot who has a system for predicting lottery numbers... one lucky hit, and now he's convinced that the system works.
Even when politicians are correct, they're still politicians. And it's far more dangerous to start believing in them than it is for the average temperature to go up 2 degrees over the next century.
On the subject of global warming... I remain unconvinced for now, but I haven't ruled it out either. I am considering investing in some beachfront property in Iowa. But the thing that gets me, is whether or not it's natural or caused by man... who gives a fuck? If it's natural, it's still a disaster and maybe one we can avoid. Why are there so many bullshit arguments from both sides? And how come if Gore gets his way, me and others like me are going to be the ones paying for it, while assholes like him fly around to global warming awareness rallies in big jets that gulp thousands of gallons of jet fuel per trip?
Fuck him and his movie.
So, one of those little single home jobs will generate enough energy to have smelted it's own steel, and powered the mining equipment to mine its own copper for the motor windings?
How about the plastic or fiberglass blades?
We need nuke plants. Preferably fusion instead of the "make everything glow in the dark and the livestock gets sickly and die" variety.
Depends on the location, of course. Most aren't suited for it. Including only those locations suitable would at most support 5% or so of our current power consumption, let alone projected growth curves.
The windmill on every rooftop thing...
Yes. And people in third world countries defecate in open latrines. Please do not do that either. But if you must do one of these two things, shit out in the open field, it's only slightly smellier, and will go away far faster than a tables-based-layout.
This is dumb. Enough cheap energy, and yes you can.
I get pissed at the fools always talking about a looming water crisis. Bullshit... we have an energy crisis. Get enough of that, and desalinization is trivial. Same thing here.
Because windmills typically only produce something on the order of 85% of the energy needed to make them in the first place within their own lifetimes?
Windmills have their uses, but they won't solve any of our major problems. You're the wife who just learned hubby was laid off and thinks that clipping a few $1 coupons will be enough... the mortgage is $2000 a month.
Only fission and fusion are enough.
Of anyone still writing, he's one of the best. I'd put him up there with James Hogan.
Songs of Earth and Power is one of my favorite fantasies, the first even. Only Tad Williams even comes close. Fred Saberhagen's Empire of the East would be the distant third.
Missing a marketing opportunity. ... now with Intel Foursome!
I said: .swf in notepad and see the source?
I can open up an
You claimed:
No, but that question is irrelevant for the vast majority of end-users.
But originally you had said...
Aside from the video codecs--...--Flash is just as open as SVG
So, you're wrong on two counts. One is being fallacious in bring up the vast-majority of end-users, who don't care about open source/standards in the first place. The second, is denying that plain-text-readability is unimportant in the context of this conversation, which is whether flash is as open as anything else.
No, but again, why does it matter if you can? Again, this might be a cute idea for a hobbyist
No, actually there are many professional web developers that would appreciate being able to create an inline vector here or there, since it's a better solution than putting in a raster that can weigh 10 times as much.
Sure. But for some odd reason, it seems like all the capable programmers have better things to do.
Dead wrong. Anyone attempting to write an open-source (or any other license, for that matter) flash player would have ravenous flesh-eating lawyers sicced on them. This isn't opinion on my part, but Macromedia's policy on the subject, which has most assuredly been inherited by Adobe (a company that was never lawyer-shy themselves).
So, once again, please tell me how in any single way flash might be "open". Doesn't even have to be "as open" as SVG, just one tiny detail. Please. It's not. It is as closed and proprietary as anything ever has been, and quite a bit more than some other software that we've ranted about.
And notice, I didn't even mention any of its other flaws, which constitute a countless horde ready to destroy the web and replace it with "LOADING..." blinkers.