You fail to understand that when the American middle class takes a hit, America takes a hit, period. Indian programmers making 1/3 of an American worker does not buy Xboxes, SUVs, or HDTVs.
Yes, that's right the world owes you an Xbox, SUV and an Plasma Screen HDTV. All because of where you were born. People who don't live in the industrialized world also deserve what they get. Starvation, pestilence, polluted water, corrupt murderous governments, whatever. obviously money has been distributed the way God intended and spreading it around is practically a sin! Haven't you ever heard of Karma? The Indians figured this shit out long ago, that's why they have a Caste system.
I mean, how can a person really be a person with out an XBOX hooked up to HDTV mounted in the steering wheel of their SUV?
Anyway, why does Oracle care what happens to the American economy relative to the world economy If India's economy goes up more Indians buy Oracle. They sell there stuff all over the world, not just here. It's the world economy that matters to these people not just the American one. And in any event an injection of highly-skilled laborers into the US population is not going to hurt the economy, certainly not to the extent outsourcing would.
It's better to have them coming here then the jobs going over there for even cheaper. Anyway, anyone whining about not making $60k/year is just pathetic. Look at the world and see how most of us (human beings) get to live. Anyone who thinks the world owes them a BMW because of where they were born gets no sympathy from me.
This is just the start - I'm not even touching on some of the data representation things they've done with the database and application server. While Oracle made a very smart move porting to Linux, they continue to be leaders in pushing Linux forward as an enterprise platform, even working around Linux's limitations where they feel they have to.
It'd be better if they fixed Linux's limitations, of course:P. The downside there is that they would either need to get their stuff installed or fork Linux, which they probably don't want to do.
Well, I've never had something I've run continuously for years and years, but in my experience you can almost always get old hardware assembled and booting. For a couple years I was running a mail server on a P200 board shoved into a 386 case and held in with just one screw. It worked.
Any kind of PC will last for a very long time, after all they have no moving parts. There are some issues with capacetors leaking, and things like that, but if they're well made you should be fine.
Could a five year old Mac even run OSX? I seriously doubt many people will enjoy using such an old machine 5 years from now, even if it is a Mac. In my experience, very old Macs seem just as slow and obnoxious as very old PCs, that haven't been upgraded.
You ought to look into the '89. It's really amazing that TI's products have been so static over the years, but also somewhat cool. Ti's most advanced calc is now the voyage 200, which is basicaly a suped up '92, from what I can tell. I remember using the 92 back in highschool.
Well, even if you claim that porn is a sin, does that make it evil? I thought the whole point of the christian church was forgiveness? To me, an act that is evil is one that cannot be forgiven, at the least.
Saddam was delusional to the end. Not insane, but really more the way Bush is. He was (by choice) surrounded by Yes-men, and he avoided thinking about the negatives. It worked pretty well until he went up against another group of self-deluding morons with a bigger army. I don't believe that Saddam thought he was evil. He thought he was doing what he needed to to unite a racially and ethnically and religiously divided nation. He didn't know what he was doing was wrong, and he didn't know it wouldn't work.
George Bernard Shaw, IIRC said "The rational man adapts to the world, the irrational man tries to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress is dependant on irrational men". I used to love that quote. But Saddam and Bush are both irrational, and they have both changed the world. I don't know if I would call it progress.
If someone wanted to take naked pictures of me, it would make me feel pretty fucking good. But that's beside the point.
The point is, people choose to be in those images. A lot of times, they look like they are having a lot of fun. Believe it or not, but some people actually like having other people appreciate the way they look. Some women enjoy the power it gives them. And, shock of shocks, some women enjoy sex and what's more, some women actually are sexually aroused by posing naked!!!!!. Hard to believe I know.
But anyway, lets take your logical assertion to the extreme. What you are saying, is that paying people to do something that harms them in some way is evil. Well then doesn't that the entire US Military totally evil? I mean, I'd much rather be objectified then dead.
Hmm... reading the rest of your post, you might agree with me. But that still doesn't change the fact that all of the women in porn are there because they chose to be, and while some may feel dirty, most don't.
Would you consider the Bombing of Hiroshima to be terrorism? You could say we weren't 'deliberately' killing civilians, but surely you wouldn't argue that we didn't know a fuck of a lot of innocent people would die if we nuked a city. Or do you take the Israeli view that it doesn't matter if civilians die as long as you were trying to kill someone else and they just happened to be in your way?
Saddam gassed the Kurds, and he is a Sunni. I'm so tired of people saying "He gassed his own people" wa wa. I mean they were in the middle of uprising or whatever.
Not that I'm defending Saddam, but lets get our terminology straight here.
Until George Bush inserted into the national dialog. To me, "Evil" was some existential thing that only something supernatural could poses. People were only "Misguided" or "greedy" or "vengeful" or "immoral", etc. I have started using the word once in awhile to refer to people who poses many of those qualities, but to me recently it really is associated with Muslim Terrorists. I was kind of trying to insult Bush and the Neocons in the same breath, but it was a little obtuse:P
Also, while I know that we should be all inclusive and culturally sensitive, do you really think I could run AP from Saudi Arabia? Even the less psycho implementations of Islam are hard on women and repressive, and I do that that's somewhat wrong. I'm sure there are lots of Muslims who are not interested in stifling others, but they seem to be in the minority.
But I do believe that if Islam fits the definition of "evil" then Christianity does as well...
What exactly is your goal in doing this? To prevent them from looking at porn? To keep pedophiles from chatting up your kids? Under your rules, your kids could look at porn all they want as long as they're willing to let you know about it, in other words, you hope your children's shame in their parents knowing about their sexual predilictions should keep them in line? Or you just want your kids to be honest about their sexuality with you? Both of those seem a little weird to me.
If I were you, I'd just use some kind URL sniffer on, and check to make sure they wern't looking at anything really weird.
For a 15 year old, I wouldn't really be worried. The only real risk would be pervs chatting them up (especially if they were a girl) But even there I'd probably stop worrying around 13 or 14 or so.
Teach your kids that "don't talk to strangers" applies online as well. (Oh, and be sure to tell them what a stranger is. When I was a child I met a girl who though "Stranger" was simply a synonym "pedophile". I told her it meant anyone she didn't know and she didn't believe me).
Definitely tell them not to ever give out their email address, or download software (probably don't want to give them admin access, unless they are a geek, in which case you should give them a Linux machine:))
But you have to be age appropriate as well. Something like the stileproject could seriously warp a little kid. Or at least it seems like it could, I'm not a psychologist.
Don't keep the door closed when you're on the computer? Geez, what horrible rule, especialy for the 15 year old.
If you're that freaked out, why not put all the computers in a "family computer lab"? Is it that painful for you to actually spend time in the same room as your kids?
I mean seriously, putting the TV, computer, etc in the kids room means the kid will spend all their time in their room alone, away from the rest of the family. Put all the entertainment devices in the same place, and you'll find yourselves actually spending time together. That's certainly what I plan on doing when I have kids (which should hopefully be quite a while from now:).
w.r.t your paranoia. There's a lot of fucked up stuff on the internet, and your kids will eventually see it anyway. I wouldn't want small children to see that stuff but the stileproject isn't going to turn a 15 year old into a psychopath.
But anyway, my solution still solves your problem. So do it.
What kind of wanker goes to London and doesn't even know about Guy Fawks day!? And what kind of pussy is scared of people setting off fireworks!? Certainly no red-blooded 4th of July celebrating American!
Also, you have the writing skills of a 5th grader.
Slashdot Mirror
And not only that, Companies on NYSE should only hire New Yorkers!
Oh wait, that dosn't make any damn sense.
You fail to understand that when the American middle class takes a hit, America takes a hit, period. Indian programmers making 1/3 of an American worker does not buy Xboxes, SUVs, or HDTVs.
Yes, that's right the world owes you an Xbox, SUV and an Plasma Screen HDTV. All because of where you were born. People who don't live in the industrialized world also deserve what they get. Starvation, pestilence, polluted water, corrupt murderous governments, whatever. obviously money has been distributed the way God intended and spreading it around is practically a sin! Haven't you ever heard of Karma? The Indians figured this shit out long ago, that's why they have a Caste system.
I mean, how can a person really be a person with out an XBOX hooked up to HDTV mounted in the steering wheel of their SUV?
Anyway, why does Oracle care what happens to the American economy relative to the world economy If India's economy goes up more Indians buy Oracle. They sell there stuff all over the world, not just here. It's the world economy that matters to these people not just the American one. And in any event an injection of highly-skilled laborers into the US population is not going to hurt the economy, certainly not to the extent outsourcing would.
It's better to have them coming here then the jobs going over there for even cheaper. Anyway, anyone whining about not making $60k/year is just pathetic. Look at the world and see how most of us (human beings) get to live. Anyone who thinks the world owes them a BMW because of where they were born gets no sympathy from me.
This is just the start - I'm not even touching on some of the data representation things they've done with the database and application server. While Oracle made a very smart move porting to Linux, they continue to be leaders in pushing Linux forward as an enterprise platform, even working around Linux's limitations where they feel they have to.
:P. The downside there is that they would either need to get their stuff installed or fork Linux, which they probably don't want to do.
It'd be better if they fixed Linux's limitations, of course
Well, I've never had something I've run continuously for years and years, but in my experience you can almost always get old hardware assembled and booting. For a couple years I was running a mail server on a P200 board shoved into a 386 case and held in with just one screw. It worked.
Any kind of PC will last for a very long time, after all they have no moving parts. There are some issues with capacetors leaking, and things like that, but if they're well made you should be fine.
Could a five year old Mac even run OSX? I seriously doubt many people will enjoy using such an old machine 5 years from now, even if it is a Mac. In my experience, very old Macs seem just as slow and obnoxious as very old PCs, that haven't been upgraded.
You ought to look into the '89. It's really amazing that TI's products have been so static over the years, but also somewhat cool. Ti's most advanced calc is now the voyage 200, which is basicaly a suped up '92, from what I can tell. I remember using the 92 back in highschool.
Well, even if you claim that porn is a sin, does that make it evil? I thought the whole point of the christian church was forgiveness? To me, an act that is evil is one that cannot be forgiven, at the least.
Go move to Saudi Arabia then. You might like it better over there.
Saddam was delusional to the end. Not insane, but really more the way Bush is. He was (by choice) surrounded by Yes-men, and he avoided thinking about the negatives. It worked pretty well until he went up against another group of self-deluding morons with a bigger army. I don't believe that Saddam thought he was evil. He thought he was doing what he needed to to unite a racially and ethnically and religiously divided nation. He didn't know what he was doing was wrong, and he didn't know it wouldn't work.
George Bernard Shaw, IIRC said "The rational man adapts to the world, the irrational man tries to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress is dependant on irrational men". I used to love that quote. But Saddam and Bush are both irrational, and they have both changed the world. I don't know if I would call it progress.
If someone wanted to take naked pictures of me, it would make me feel pretty fucking good. But that's beside the point.
The point is, people choose to be in those images. A lot of times, they look like they are having a lot of fun. Believe it or not, but some people actually like having other people appreciate the way they look. Some women enjoy the power it gives them. And, shock of shocks, some women enjoy sex and what's more, some women actually are sexually aroused by posing naked!!!!!. Hard to believe I know.
But anyway, lets take your logical assertion to the extreme. What you are saying, is that paying people to do something that harms them in some way is evil. Well then doesn't that the entire US Military totally evil? I mean, I'd much rather be objectified then dead.
Hmm... reading the rest of your post, you might agree with me. But that still doesn't change the fact that all of the women in porn are there because they chose to be, and while some may feel dirty, most don't.
Would you consider the Bombing of Hiroshima to be terrorism? You could say we weren't 'deliberately' killing civilians, but surely you wouldn't argue that we didn't know a fuck of a lot of innocent people would die if we nuked a city. Or do you take the Israeli view that it doesn't matter if civilians die as long as you were trying to kill someone else and they just happened to be in your way?
Saddam gassed the Kurds, and he is a Sunni. I'm so tired of people saying "He gassed his own people" wa wa. I mean they were in the middle of uprising or whatever.
Not that I'm defending Saddam, but lets get our terminology straight here.
Until George Bush inserted into the national dialog. To me, "Evil" was some existential thing that only something supernatural could poses. People were only "Misguided" or "greedy" or "vengeful" or "immoral", etc. I have started using the word once in awhile to refer to people who poses many of those qualities, but to me recently it really is associated with Muslim Terrorists. I was kind of trying to insult Bush and the Neocons in the same breath, but it was a little obtuse :P
Also, while I know that we should be all inclusive and culturally sensitive, do you really think I could run AP from Saudi Arabia? Even the less psycho implementations of Islam are hard on women and repressive, and I do that that's somewhat wrong. I'm sure there are lots of Muslims who are not interested in stifling others, but they seem to be in the minority.
But I do believe that if Islam fits the definition of "evil" then Christianity does as well...
Sue the pants off spam software makers and spammers. hehehe. Not like I'd actualy have the resources to find 'em, of course.
Fifteen years later, I'm an out of work web developer who can type really fast and find you a copy of the Paris Hilton video in less than two minutes
Got a link?
"One horsepower is the amount of energy it takes to drag a horse 500 feet in one second." (unattributed)
That dosn't make any sense at all. It would take far more then one horse power to drag a horse that fast with any resonable amount of friction.
Going contrary to good advice merely to spite the person giving the advice actually does nothing more than show an overwhelming lack of maturity.
If the kids were mature, you wouldn't need any rules at all.
The same prinicple applies with many of the evils online (pornogrophy, violence, fostering bad relationships, etc..)
Pornography is evil now? Wow, I'm right up there with Saddam Hussen. But where the hell are my 70 virgins!?
What exactly is your goal in doing this? To prevent them from looking at porn? To keep pedophiles from chatting up your kids? Under your rules, your kids could look at porn all they want as long as they're willing to let you know about it, in other words, you hope your children's shame in their parents knowing about their sexual predilictions should keep them in line? Or you just want your kids to be honest about their sexuality with you? Both of those seem a little weird to me.
If I were you, I'd just use some kind URL sniffer on, and check to make sure they wern't looking at anything really weird.
For a 15 year old, I wouldn't really be worried. The only real risk would be pervs chatting them up (especially if they were a girl) But even there I'd probably stop worrying around 13 or 14 or so.
:))
Teach your kids that "don't talk to strangers" applies online as well. (Oh, and be sure to tell them what a stranger is. When I was a child I met a girl who though "Stranger" was simply a synonym "pedophile". I told her it meant anyone she didn't know and she didn't believe me).
Definitely tell them not to ever give out their email address, or download software (probably don't want to give them admin access, unless they are a geek, in which case you should give them a Linux machine
But you have to be age appropriate as well. Something like the stileproject could seriously warp a little kid. Or at least it seems like it could, I'm not a psychologist.
Don't keep the door closed when you're on the computer? Geez, what horrible rule, especialy for the 15 year old.
:).
If you're that freaked out, why not put all the computers in a "family computer lab"? Is it that painful for you to actually spend time in the same room as your kids?
I mean seriously, putting the TV, computer, etc in the kids room means the kid will spend all their time in their room alone, away from the rest of the family. Put all the entertainment devices in the same place, and you'll find yourselves actually spending time together. That's certainly what I plan on doing when I have kids (which should hopefully be quite a while from now
w.r.t your paranoia. There's a lot of fucked up stuff on the internet, and your kids will eventually see it anyway. I wouldn't want small children to see that stuff but the stileproject isn't going to turn a 15 year old into a psychopath.
But anyway, my solution still solves your problem. So do it.
IIRC, there are at least 11 diffrent Wifi Channels to use.
IIRC, the only regulations for those frequencies are power restrictions. Beyond that, you can do whatever you want. Even if it breaks everything else.
It may be that the FCC would consider two seperate broadcasts can only use half the power each, but I kind of doubt it.
What kind of wanker goes to London and doesn't even know about Guy Fawks day!? And what kind of pussy is scared of people setting off fireworks!? Certainly no red-blooded 4th of July celebrating American!
Also, you have the writing skills of a 5th grader.