See, that's a serious image problem right there. Since absolutely no self-described socialist or communist government in the world is considered "true" socialism or communism by those philosophy's respective defenders (who then go on to praise "socialist" European nations that are, in fact, simply capitalism plus robust welfare), it leads the rest of us to believe that those philosophies are simply impossible to implement in reality.
Man, all you did was throw red meat to the dogs. Customer service departments exist because all your most well-intentioned communication can do give angry people a chance to exact revenge for your company's perceived slights against them by attacking you. At long last, someone they can blame. You really need to let your customer service dept. handle this.
FWIW, the Magic Mouse is two button (errr... two touch?) and swipable not just up and down (for scrolling), but side to side also (does not, however, support the three-finger swipe of the Magic Pad). It's weird; I didn't like it at first (predominantly PC user), but after a while I really, really dug it and wish I had something like it for the PC.
My Razer Naga is still going strong after 8 years. I use the hell out of it, too. But I am glad that other manufacturers are getting in on the side 12 buttons thing, so my options are open if Razer ever dies. I had another friend who bought one at the same time I did, but it died six months later. The lesson she took away was to buy two, so when it breaks she doesn't have to wait for the replacement. The Naga was just that useful to her. Unfortunately, she jinxed it and the second one is still sitting in the box in a closet.
And this is why we should not teach CS101 in Java or Python. If they'd been forced to use C this whole experiment would have turned out differently. Even the professors are getting lazy, now.
The criticism is finally apt. I've always defended IBM against accusations of Nazi collaboration on the grounds that the Hollerith machines (used to make the holocaust more efficient) were built in Germany by a German IBM subsidiary, and they were sold for peaceful, legitimate purpose. That branch came under Nazi control, and IBM was not able to reclaim it until after the war. So far, not IBM's fault.
But now? To perform the same exact action, with a state that has killed many times over as the Nazi's? NOW they are culpable for everything the Chinese do with their technology. They are going into this eyes wide open.
They don't NEED to learn how to code. But the exposure can be transformative. In 1985, my First Grade class was involved in an IBM pilot program where our learning was augmented with computers. I learned how to read from a self-paced reading program on an IBM PCjr. In the span of weeks, I went from "See spot run. Run spot, run." to a sixth grade reading level and YA fiction novels. A rep from the program came in for a special session where we learned how to get into BASIC and do some simple math programs on the computer. From that moment, six year old me knew that I wanted to program for the rest of my life. I didn't even have a computer, and wouldn't until I was 14 years old, but that dream never left me, and everything I did went towards that. If I'd had continued exposure to computers, there is no telling how much better off I'd be right now. I spent a lot of my middle school and high school years teaching myself programming with nothing but the foggy memories of First Grade and the QBasic Help file.
Because everyone feels like they need the truly dirty work done, but no one wants to sully their hands with it. We outsource clean hands to the cognitively dissonant.
Readers of the original KJV (usually pentacostal or charismatic churches) suffer from significant language drift. They're reading sixteenth century words and applying twentieth century definitions to them, which definitely alters the meaning of key passages.
For instance, take I Corinthians 13: "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." (NIV) But in KJV, it says: "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
A sixteenth century reader would have the right idea, but a twentieth century reader will miss the entire point.
I will be honest, a lot of this is stuff I am picking up for the first time; but it's fascinating to me so I did some looking up. If you think I'm using a questionable source, let me know.
Wikipedia cites 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War by Benny Morris:
The Arabs refused to accept the establishment of a Jewish state in any part of Palestine. And, consistently with that “no,” the Palestinian Arabs, in November–December 1947, and the Arab states in May 1948, launched hostilities to scupper the resolution’s implementation
The mindset characterized both the public and the ruling elites. All vilified the Yishuv and opposed the existence of a Jewish state on “their” (sacred Islamic) soil, and all sought its extirpation, albeit with varying degrees of bloody-mindedness. Shouts of “Idbah al Yahud” (slaughter the Jews) characterized equally street demonstrations in Jaffa, Cairo, Damascus, and Baghdad both before and during the war and were, in essence, echoed, usually in tamer language, by most Arab leaders.
It seems the initial rejection was due to religious (or ethnic disguised as religious) reasons.
During the ensuing war, the Civil War of 1947-48, the Jews won a decisive victory but ended up with (and I don't fully comprehend how or why) effective control of only a tithe of the land originally granted them by the mandate. In May of 1948, the state of Israel was formally declared, followed by immediate invasion by Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. It was as a result of this second war that Israel expanded control to over three-quarters of the original mandate.
This is interesting to me because I had formerly believed that the Jews were simply handed regional control, while the May 18, 1948 map of the Yishuv-controlled territory seems to belie this.
were those senators actively undermining current, ongoing diplomacy?
Our position at the time was to have no diplomacy at all, so it was at cross-purposes.
some idiot visiting a lame regime is not the same thing at all
If you're going to stick to a strict observation of the law, then you have to accept that all communication with foreign powers, whether official, unofficial, or innocuous, or whatever, is illegal and punishable for up to 3 years. But that's not common sense, right? Which is why the Logan Act is of questionable constitutionality.
In 1975, Sen. Sparkman and Sen. McGovern traveled to Cuba and met with government officials. The State Dept. concluded of the Logan Act:
The clear intent of this provision is to prohibit unauthorized persons from intervening in disputes between the United States and foreign governments. Nothing in section 953, however, would appear to restrict members of the Congress from engaging in discussions with foreign officials in pursuance of their legislative duties under the Constitution.
And one of the legislative duties of the House and Senate is writing and passing treaties, as is their sole prerogative.
Furthermore, there has never in the history of this country been a prosecution under the Logan Act, and in 2006 a House panel considering whether a trip by Nancy Pelosi to Syria was a potential violation declined to do anything, having concluded that the law may not actually be constitutional to begin with.
And claiming that "the Arab world has significantly regressed since the 1960's, and largely due to American and British corporate interventionism" is ludicrous: in fact, the Arab world has improved greatly economically since the 1960's, and liberalization of trade and influx of Western investment is responsible for that.
If all you care about is trade, yeah, they're super awesome. If you care about anything else, they're still medieval loonies.
Slashdot Mirror
It's cool, and tabs are important. Like it's 1960.
You forgot "how long will it take?", but this is the nature of all proposals.
Judging from my local road construction, I don't think time factors into government calculus.
Having a flight-attendant sit in for a two-person rule may not have saved the plane, but at least the co-pilot would have to work harder for it.
See, that's a serious image problem right there. Since absolutely no self-described socialist or communist government in the world is considered "true" socialism or communism by those philosophy's respective defenders (who then go on to praise "socialist" European nations that are, in fact, simply capitalism plus robust welfare), it leads the rest of us to believe that those philosophies are simply impossible to implement in reality.
"This isn't right. You only paid $20 for this hammer? Bros, do you even bureaucrat? Here, lemme show you..."
Man, all you did was throw red meat to the dogs. Customer service departments exist because all your most well-intentioned communication can do give angry people a chance to exact revenge for your company's perceived slights against them by attacking you. At long last, someone they can blame. You really need to let your customer service dept. handle this.
FWIW, the Magic Mouse is two button (errr... two touch?) and swipable not just up and down (for scrolling), but side to side also (does not, however, support the three-finger swipe of the Magic Pad). It's weird; I didn't like it at first (predominantly PC user), but after a while I really, really dug it and wish I had something like it for the PC.
My Razer Naga is still going strong after 8 years. I use the hell out of it, too. But I am glad that other manufacturers are getting in on the side 12 buttons thing, so my options are open if Razer ever dies. I had another friend who bought one at the same time I did, but it died six months later. The lesson she took away was to buy two, so when it breaks she doesn't have to wait for the replacement. The Naga was just that useful to her. Unfortunately, she jinxed it and the second one is still sitting in the box in a closet.
I stand corrected. And I assert that a professor of CS from Calgary or BC should know better than me, anyhow.
And this is why we should not teach CS101 in Java or Python. If they'd been forced to use C this whole experiment would have turned out differently. Even the professors are getting lazy, now.
1. Eyup.
2. They actually did flush.
3. Absolutely.
The criticism is finally apt. I've always defended IBM against accusations of Nazi collaboration on the grounds that the Hollerith machines (used to make the holocaust more efficient) were built in Germany by a German IBM subsidiary, and they were sold for peaceful, legitimate purpose. That branch came under Nazi control, and IBM was not able to reclaim it until after the war. So far, not IBM's fault.
But now? To perform the same exact action, with a state that has killed many times over as the Nazi's? NOW they are culpable for everything the Chinese do with their technology. They are going into this eyes wide open.
Well, in Star Wars they are called deflector shields, after all.
They don't NEED to learn how to code. But the exposure can be transformative. In 1985, my First Grade class was involved in an IBM pilot program where our learning was augmented with computers. I learned how to read from a self-paced reading program on an IBM PCjr. In the span of weeks, I went from "See spot run. Run spot, run." to a sixth grade reading level and YA fiction novels. A rep from the program came in for a special session where we learned how to get into BASIC and do some simple math programs on the computer. From that moment, six year old me knew that I wanted to program for the rest of my life. I didn't even have a computer, and wouldn't until I was 14 years old, but that dream never left me, and everything I did went towards that. If I'd had continued exposure to computers, there is no telling how much better off I'd be right now. I spent a lot of my middle school and high school years teaching myself programming with nothing but the foggy memories of First Grade and the QBasic Help file.
Because everyone feels like they need the truly dirty work done, but no one wants to sully their hands with it. We outsource clean hands to the cognitively dissonant.
You cannot implicitly denounce invasive intelligence while enjoying its ill-gotten fruits.
...to air drop some Freedom on those dirty pirates.
/duck
/run
You assume that the original KJV translation used the correct translation of the original material, and that our later translations don't.
If I conveyed that idea to you, then I have severely miscommunicated. That is exactly the opposite of what I believe to be the case.
Readers of the original KJV (usually pentacostal or charismatic churches) suffer from significant language drift. They're reading sixteenth century words and applying twentieth century definitions to them, which definitely alters the meaning of key passages.
For instance, take I Corinthians 13: "And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love." (NIV)
But in KJV, it says: "And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."
A sixteenth century reader would have the right idea, but a twentieth century reader will miss the entire point.
It's possible that you have contracted The Embuggerance.
Pacelbel's estate is going to be filthy rich (when copyrights go back that far, should be any time now): https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
I will be honest, a lot of this is stuff I am picking up for the first time; but it's fascinating to me so I did some looking up. If you think I'm using a questionable source, let me know.
Wikipedia cites 1948: A History of the First Arab-Israeli War by Benny Morris:
The Arabs refused to accept the establishment of a Jewish state in any part of Palestine. And, consistently with that “no,” the Palestinian Arabs, in November–December 1947, and the Arab states in May 1948, launched hostilities to scupper the resolution’s implementation
The mindset characterized both the public and the ruling elites. All vilified the Yishuv and opposed the existence of a Jewish state on “their” (sacred Islamic) soil, and all sought its extirpation, albeit with varying degrees of bloody-mindedness. Shouts of “Idbah al Yahud” (slaughter the Jews) characterized equally street demonstrations in Jaffa, Cairo, Damascus, and Baghdad both before and during the war and were, in essence, echoed, usually in tamer language, by most Arab leaders.
It seems the initial rejection was due to religious (or ethnic disguised as religious) reasons.
During the ensuing war, the Civil War of 1947-48, the Jews won a decisive victory but ended up with (and I don't fully comprehend how or why) effective control of only a tithe of the land originally granted them by the mandate. In May of 1948, the state of Israel was formally declared, followed by immediate invasion by Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. It was as a result of this second war that Israel expanded control to over three-quarters of the original mandate.
This is interesting to me because I had formerly believed that the Jews were simply handed regional control, while the May 18, 1948 map of the Yishuv-controlled territory seems to belie this.
were those senators actively undermining current, ongoing diplomacy?
Our position at the time was to have no diplomacy at all, so it was at cross-purposes.
some idiot visiting a lame regime is not the same thing at all
If you're going to stick to a strict observation of the law, then you have to accept that all communication with foreign powers, whether official, unofficial, or innocuous, or whatever, is illegal and punishable for up to 3 years. But that's not common sense, right? Which is why the Logan Act is of questionable constitutionality.
In 1975, Sen. Sparkman and Sen. McGovern traveled to Cuba and met with government officials. The State Dept. concluded of the Logan Act:
And one of the legislative duties of the House and Senate is writing and passing treaties, as is their sole prerogative.
Furthermore, there has never in the history of this country been a prosecution under the Logan Act, and in 2006 a House panel considering whether a trip by Nancy Pelosi to Syria was a potential violation declined to do anything, having concluded that the law may not actually be constitutional to begin with.
And claiming that "the Arab world has significantly regressed since the 1960's, and largely due to American and British corporate interventionism" is ludicrous: in fact, the Arab world has improved greatly economically since the 1960's, and liberalization of trade and influx of Western investment is responsible for that.
If all you care about is trade, yeah, they're super awesome. If you care about anything else, they're still medieval loonies.