Yes, the problem here is that security procedures are too tight, get rid of them and I'm sure our data will be completely safe. And the banks all went bust because regulations didn't allow them to be even more greedy and wreckless!
Why should a kid get an inferior education just because of where he is? He didn't choose to live in the ghetto. A better solution would be to send smart poor kids to the good school, and vice versa. But that would never happen, as the middle-class elite don't want their thick kid getting the same education as all the other thick kids.
Maybe parties and candidates don't represent libertarian views, because libertarianism is a niche philosophy which would alienate huge sections of the population.
Let's say I go to a restaurant, the only place to eat in town, and there are two dishes on offer. One is a rotten fish, full of maggots. The other is a burger made from cow shit. If I walk out, do I not have the right to complain about being hungry?
No. And by that, I actually mean yes, which is now the new word for no. I do see what the problem is with people unmisunderstanding language by missing off negativising prefixes. And by prefixes I mean subfixes, the word has simply evolved through misuse.
Imagine getting up in the morning, taking an elevator down to go to work in accounting office on floor 10, taking lunch two stories up, leaving early to down to floor 5 to visit the dentist, pick up your kids from daycare on 12, go to the roof to play some frisbee before dropping a floor to have a nice meal in the penthouse restraunt before heading home on floor 40.
If I wanted to live my entire life in a single building I'd join the navy. Or become Alan Partridge.
*BTW, I'm wierd in that I don't think homes appreciate in value; the LAND, if in an area of expanding development does, but the house doesn't. It just depreciates slower than inflation and value can be kept up/increased with renovations. I figure this is part of the reason for the housing collapse - people were sold a different 'truth', which finally broke down.
Houses go up in value. There's only so much land, and it costs money to build them. Maybe those cheap American wooden things only go up in value with the land, but an 18th century manor is definitely going to set you back. The housing market collapsed because prices were inflated by ridiculous loans.
Yes I am sure you have all heard about it and I am quite sure most of you have done it to one degree or another. That is when you just touch the car behind or in front of you while trying to parallel park.
I have to say this, I've never done that in my years of driving. Hopefully the sorts of people who can't park without hitting other cars don't fly anyway.
They are both funny, the only difference is the target audience. We happen to be the target audience of xkcd, and that is why Munroe is famous on slashdot and Katz is a cartoonist for the New Yorker.
Personally I think they're both pretty awful and unfunny.
Open source software means that everyone can change their software to suit their own needs. So in open source government, I could give myself a lower income tax, and legalise cocaine in my own house.
but if you stick with all the apps with a G as the first letter you can be assured a standard UI if you are using Gnome, likewise if K is the first letter you can be assured that it uses a standard UI for KDE,
Well, that makes sense. The problem with Linux, is that each app has its own widgets, its own theme, its own file selector etc. And when some programs install they don't even get into the menus so you can't open them. And some apps don't have packages for your distribution. And some apps only come as source. Etc.
The most pathetic aspect is that he's taken a game, the whole point of which is its massively multiplayer aspect, and spent thousands and thousands of dollars to turn it into a single player game.
Considering he's bought nine computers, thirty-six copies of a game, thirty-six expensive subscriptions, just to play by himself against AI, he could have just bought an offline game which would give him the same experience at a fraction of the cost.
But what I want to know more than anything, is what job pays you the salary that means you can afford all this shit, but still allows you the time to spend nearly every waking hour playing computer games.
If your product works, or at least appears to, and you have a sound plan for getting it to market, where it will be purchased, then SOMEONE will loan you the money.
Except of course, if no-one has any money to lend you, and no-one has any money to buy your product. The Tesla is aimed at the super-rich, but the super-rich don't drive electric cars with poor range, this may be the main problem.
Even an open case has a lid on, and has sides to put on when you're moving it, or watering the plants, or doing some DIY nearby, or in fact anything at all. This is a disaster waiting to happen.
And having seen the picture, a normal PC with the sides off seems to offer easier access and a better view than this monstrosity.
I'm not sure how this ruling makes sense, given that the article didn't actually say what the legal definition of "complex" was.
Not that I have much faith in the English justice system, but I'm pretty sure that judges will base their rulings on the actual law, rather than an article about the law.
So you're telling me that the civil service made the decision to outsource sensitive data all by themselves? Even if they did, then either Labour knew about it and did nothing, meaning they were culpable, or didn't know about it, in which case they're incompetent.
Sorry but whichever way you look at it, your party and government are horrendously terrible.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, the problem here is that security procedures are too tight, get rid of them and I'm sure our data will be completely safe. And the banks all went bust because regulations didn't allow them to be even more greedy and wreckless!
I'd imagine most people get a degree at 21 or 22, so maybe a year ahead. I suppose that was worth one parent losing fifteen years of income.
Why should a kid get an inferior education just because of where he is? He didn't choose to live in the ghetto. A better solution would be to send smart poor kids to the good school, and vice versa. But that would never happen, as the middle-class elite don't want their thick kid getting the same education as all the other thick kids.
As opposed to private boarding schools, where the rich send their kids at age 5 and pick them up again at 18?
Maybe parties and candidates don't represent libertarian views, because libertarianism is a niche philosophy which would alienate huge sections of the population.
Let's say I go to a restaurant, the only place to eat in town, and there are two dishes on offer. One is a rotten fish, full of maggots. The other is a burger made from cow shit. If I walk out, do I not have the right to complain about being hungry?
No. And by that, I actually mean yes, which is now the new word for no. I do see what the problem is with people unmisunderstanding language by missing off negativising prefixes. And by prefixes I mean subfixes, the word has simply evolved through misuse.
If I wanted to live my entire life in a single building I'd join the navy. Or become Alan Partridge.
Houses go up in value. There's only so much land, and it costs money to build them. Maybe those cheap American wooden things only go up in value with the land, but an 18th century manor is definitely going to set you back. The housing market collapsed because prices were inflated by ridiculous loans.
As far as MMOs go, latency is the main barrier to decent gameplay.
Why should Afghans care if the rest of the world want to be smackheads?
I have to say this, I've never done that in my years of driving. Hopefully the sorts of people who can't park without hitting other cars don't fly anyway.
8 dollars a gallon isn't a lot, you'd struggle to get petrol for that in many places. And if you can afford to fly the cost of fuel is neglible.
Personally I think they're both pretty awful and unfunny.
Same goes for Munroe/Katz.
Mathematical logic, dealing with 1s and 0s. The real world is not a series of binary sums with clearly defined values and rules.
Open source software means that everyone can change their software to suit their own needs. So in open source government, I could give myself a lower income tax, and legalise cocaine in my own house.
Well, that makes sense. The problem with Linux, is that each app has its own widgets, its own theme, its own file selector etc. And when some programs install they don't even get into the menus so you can't open them. And some apps don't have packages for your distribution. And some apps only come as source. Etc.
The most pathetic aspect is that he's taken a game, the whole point of which is its massively multiplayer aspect, and spent thousands and thousands of dollars to turn it into a single player game.
Considering he's bought nine computers, thirty-six copies of a game, thirty-six expensive subscriptions, just to play by himself against AI, he could have just bought an offline game which would give him the same experience at a fraction of the cost.
But what I want to know more than anything, is what job pays you the salary that means you can afford all this shit, but still allows you the time to spend nearly every waking hour playing computer games.
The Tesla is more expensive and has a much shorter driving time. Maybe it was a good example after all.
Except of course, if no-one has any money to lend you, and no-one has any money to buy your product. The Tesla is aimed at the super-rich, but the super-rich don't drive electric cars with poor range, this may be the main problem.
Even an open case has a lid on, and has sides to put on when you're moving it, or watering the plants, or doing some DIY nearby, or in fact anything at all. This is a disaster waiting to happen.
And having seen the picture, a normal PC with the sides off seems to offer easier access and a better view than this monstrosity.
Not that I have much faith in the English justice system, but I'm pretty sure that judges will base their rulings on the actual law, rather than an article about the law.
Actually coasting uses up fuel to keep the engine turning over, you're better off leaving the clutch up.
So you're telling me that the civil service made the decision to outsource sensitive data all by themselves? Even if they did, then either Labour knew about it and did nothing, meaning they were culpable, or didn't know about it, in which case they're incompetent.
Sorry but whichever way you look at it, your party and government are horrendously terrible.
More efficient to just shoot you instead.
What exactly is the MoD doing sending out sensitive data to foreign private contractors? In fact, why are they giving anyone data at all?
Fuck Labour.