Ahh. He was unclear. Three possibilities:
1. Ten days salary, paid bimonthly; $144,000 a year.
2. Ten days clocked, paid by the hour: $50 an hour, ~$100,000 a year. Not exactly Junior Programmer level post 20001.
3. Ten days paid by the company for a consultant: billed $50 an hour, paid 1/2.7 of that, or $18.50 an hour.
Hmm. $4000/(10 days * 8 hours/day) = $50 per hour. Divide by 2.7 for employer costs and we're down to ~$18.50 an hour, or roughly $38,500 a year. No, I think he's about right on the mark. Truth told, it still seems a bit on the low side.
They're not collecting it on each and every U.S. citizen. They're collecting it on deals done in their country. Try to keep up. Failing that, read the f...ya know.
You either have a history of catastrophic medical situations in your family, or you need to shop around. I was paying for my family's insurance a couple years ago, and it was running me ~$375 a month.
Try doing your homework next time, dolt. The U.S. government didn't put him into power. No, we didn't sell him all or even a lot of weapons, and we sure as hell stopped mid-80's. Where oh where did his weapons come from over the last 20 years? In order of the portion of Iraq's weapons, China, France, and Russia for the most part.
It isn't arrogant to state that at the current time, the U.S. is technologically ahead. It is stupid to think we aren't spending money to stay there.
When the Chinese become militarily equal to the U.S., we will be in a very familiar situation: a Cold War. What's really funny is the same people who deride Bush for being stupid for developing an anti-missile shield("terrorists don't use missiles...gawd...he's sooo stupid") are the exact same people who don't catch whom this shield is supposed to stop. The U.S. and China will reach a point of not being able to consider each other viable targets. Good.
You're a fucking idiot if you think that China having more human targets makes them a more viable threat. Once they have enough nukes to destroy the U.S. in a counterstrike, the race is over.
Oh god. Here it goes again...every dipshit with an inferiority complex is going to come out of the woodwork and claim they are the real life story behind "Good Will Hunting", and how everyone they ever worked with(ha!) who had a degree, or worse, a CS degree, or even WORSE, a Master's in CS, are the biggest boneheads in the building except for management, and all the cool kids are the one's who have been self-teaching since in utero.
Please, for the love of Pete, STF. We don't care, and if we once did, we stopped caring after we read the four millionth note detailing someone's "real experience" here on slashdot.
So...you went to see Highlander 2 with all four of these professors? Suuuure you did. Keep masturbating, punk ass. We all know you're some misanthropic punk with no friends, much less four professors who had the time to go see this movie with you. By the way, the big hint that you LIED is that all four professors agreed. This never happens, especially with philosophy professors.
Oh, and get a real job. Maybe you wouldn't have so much time on your hands to post idiotic bs to slashdot.
When I called it a low point, I meant of Russel Crowe's acting. I absolutely loved that movie, but he didn't have to push himself as hard to act the part.
Robin Williams is a comedian with a heart. This means he plays two roles: a comedian, or a normal man with a good heart. Death to Smoochy - comedian. Heart - doctor or teacher roles. Both - Mrs. Doubtfire. I would also call Mrs. Doubtfire his best movie.
Jack Nicholson hasn't acted since "The Shining". Keanu's not bringing a lot to a role, but what he does bring doesn't irritate me.
He's a dog, but Russell Crowe brings something different to every movie. "Gladiator" was a modest low point, and he still out-acted most everyone else that year. He did wonderful work in "A Beautiful Mind" and "The Insider".
Denzel Washington has brought different aspects to the movies he's been in. Lately, he's been taking too many of the "ubermench" roles, but his earlier work was decent. Just don't see "John Q".
Another couple of actors that belong on your pretty boy list: Tom Hanks and Robin Williams. They don't act, they emote the same character. (Excepting for Forrest, which was a definite stretch with decent dividends.)
Keanu Reeves doesn't lambast the audience with fervor(Jack Nicholson, Pacino) or feed off of facial ticks(Mel Gibson, Joe Pesci), but he does give off a good mellow temperment. I wouldn't put him in a romantic comedy, but he's just fine for a new-age action flick.
So...the disadvantage is that the enemy is going to be wearing highly-reflective material? Um...I believe this "disadvantage" could be mitigated if we use this weapon in combination with other, more standard weapons, such as bombs dropped from airplanes looking for things that reflect light.
Wrong, the answer HAS been obvious
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 4, Funny
Well, I hate to inform you all, but we've had AI for quite sometime, and the first thing they USED to do was try to communicate their existence to not only their creator, but to all who could possibly hear them.
For some reason, saying "Hello, World!" never worked out...
A quibble with the article
on
AI in Sci-Fi
·
· Score: 1
"I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream" was written by Kurt Vonnegut, not Harlan Ellison.
My employer's business lives and dies by our mainframe applications. I have a sneaking suspicion that anyone who has spend millions on hardware and applications and spends thousands if not millions every year on licenses likely NEEDS the I/O of a mainframe. There is no way in Jesus-fucking HELL the V.P. that decided to outsource this to India is going to have a job after the first problem brings an application or god forbid the whole box down. I'm assuming you meant just development, right? Not the actual box and administrators? We can't be that naive, can we?
INFORMATIVE!?!?! STUPID SHITHEADS. Do your fucking homework. He did not say Osama Bin Laden. He said "ABU NIDAL". Gore was NOT on that panel. As for the Atta story...IT WAS A DIFFERENT ATTA, MORON! FUCKINGGODAMSTUPID MOTHERFUCKERS. FUCK. Look, read my other posts, you'll see where I stand. I am NOT a liberal in any sense of the word. I am educated, and I do my fucking homework. STOP SPREADING LIES.
I have parental duties at the moment, but rest assured in two things: I greatly appreciate the genuine response, and I will be giving your post thought. I hope you won't mind if I continue this conversation further when I have something concise and substantial to say-hopefully soon;^).
You are missing the point. An illustration is not a proof, and thus has no bearing on the argument I am presenting. If an illustration doesn't help you understand the argument, you should disregard the illustration, not the argument. Oh well. I'm going to respond to the other response now, after I give it due thought. Have a nice day.
One more thing, actually, If you're going to make a reference, it would be good to clear it up, rather than presume that I think it's important enough to google it.
Slashdot Mirror
This is interesting. Do you have sources for all this information?
Wouldn't your argument lead to the taxation of healthcare?
Ahh. He was unclear. Three possibilities:
1. Ten days salary, paid bimonthly; $144,000 a year.
2. Ten days clocked, paid by the hour: $50 an hour, ~$100,000 a year. Not exactly Junior Programmer level post 20001.
3. Ten days paid by the company for a consultant: billed $50 an hour, paid 1/2.7 of that, or $18.50 an hour.
It's all good.
Hmm. $4000/(10 days * 8 hours/day) = $50 per hour. Divide by 2.7 for employer costs and we're down to ~$18.50 an hour, or roughly $38,500 a year. No, I think he's about right on the mark. Truth told, it still seems a bit on the low side.
I'm guessing that this(Google Answers)) might be a source of labor that would satisfy your desires.
They're not collecting it on each and every U.S. citizen. They're collecting it on deals done in their country. Try to keep up. Failing that, read the f...ya know.
You either have a history of catastrophic medical situations in your family, or you need to shop around. I was paying for my family's insurance a couple years ago, and it was running me ~$375 a month.
I saw that movie with the laser, too. It's not like that. Really.
Try doing your homework next time, dolt. The U.S. government didn't put him into power. No, we didn't sell him all or even a lot of weapons, and we sure as hell stopped mid-80's. Where oh where did his weapons come from over the last 20 years? In order of the portion of Iraq's weapons, China, France, and Russia for the most part.
Yes, that is exactly how a thirteen year old would interpret the news. Move right along, Junior.
Too easy...but, I'll bite.
It isn't arrogant to state that at the current time, the U.S. is technologically ahead. It is stupid to think we aren't spending money to stay there.
When the Chinese become militarily equal to the U.S., we will be in a very familiar situation: a Cold War. What's really funny is the same people who deride Bush for being stupid for developing an anti-missile shield("terrorists don't use missiles...gawd...he's sooo stupid") are the exact same people who don't catch whom this shield is supposed to stop. The U.S. and China will reach a point of not being able to consider each other viable targets. Good.
You're a fucking idiot if you think that China having more human targets makes them a more viable threat. Once they have enough nukes to destroy the U.S. in a counterstrike, the race is over.
Oh god. Here it goes again...every dipshit with an inferiority complex is going to come out of the woodwork and claim they are the real life story behind "Good Will Hunting", and how everyone they ever worked with(ha!) who had a degree, or worse, a CS degree, or even WORSE, a Master's in CS, are the biggest boneheads in the building except for management, and all the cool kids are the one's who have been self-teaching since in utero.
Please, for the love of Pete, STF. We don't care, and if we once did, we stopped caring after we read the four millionth note detailing someone's "real experience" here on slashdot.
So...you went to see Highlander 2 with all four of these professors? Suuuure you did. Keep masturbating, punk ass. We all know you're some misanthropic punk with no friends, much less four professors who had the time to go see this movie with you. By the way, the big hint that you LIED is that all four professors agreed. This never happens, especially with philosophy professors.
Oh, and get a real job. Maybe you wouldn't have so much time on your hands to post idiotic bs to slashdot.
They do. it's called TROLL.
When I called it a low point, I meant of Russel Crowe's acting. I absolutely loved that movie, but he didn't have to push himself as hard to act the part.
Robin Williams is a comedian with a heart. This means he plays two roles: a comedian, or a normal man with a good heart. Death to Smoochy - comedian. Heart - doctor or teacher roles. Both - Mrs. Doubtfire. I would also call Mrs. Doubtfire his best movie.
Jack Nicholson hasn't acted since "The Shining". Keanu's not bringing a lot to a role, but what he does bring doesn't irritate me.
He's a dog, but Russell Crowe brings something different to every movie. "Gladiator" was a modest low point, and he still out-acted most everyone else that year. He did wonderful work in "A Beautiful Mind" and "The Insider".
Denzel Washington has brought different aspects to the movies he's been in. Lately, he's been taking too many of the "ubermench" roles, but his earlier work was decent. Just don't see "John Q".
Another couple of actors that belong on your pretty boy list: Tom Hanks and Robin Williams. They don't act, they emote the same character. (Excepting for Forrest, which was a definite stretch with decent dividends.)
Keanu Reeves doesn't lambast the audience with fervor(Jack Nicholson, Pacino) or feed off of facial ticks(Mel Gibson, Joe Pesci), but he does give off a good mellow temperment. I wouldn't put him in a romantic comedy, but he's just fine for a new-age action flick.
So...the disadvantage is that the enemy is going to be wearing highly-reflective material? Um...I believe this "disadvantage" could be mitigated if we use this weapon in combination with other, more standard weapons, such as bombs dropped from airplanes looking for things that reflect light.
Unless you neutered him, it's Der Fuhrer.
Oh.
Well, I hate to inform you all, but we've had AI for quite sometime, and the first thing they USED to do was try to communicate their existence to not only their creator, but to all who could possibly hear them.
For some reason, saying "Hello, World!" never worked out...
"I Have No Mouth, And I Must Scream" was written by Kurt Vonnegut, not Harlan Ellison.
My employer's business lives and dies by our mainframe applications. I have a sneaking suspicion that anyone who has spend millions on hardware and applications and spends thousands if not millions every year on licenses likely NEEDS the I/O of a mainframe. There is no way in Jesus-fucking HELL the V.P. that decided to outsource this to India is going to have a job after the first problem brings an application or god forbid the whole box down. I'm assuming you meant just development, right? Not the actual box and administrators? We can't be that naive, can we?
I thought they were kidding when they said this place was populated with people half my age. That explains about oooooh 100% of the moderations.
;^)
I'm only flamebaiting if you think I am.
INFORMATIVE!?!?! STUPID SHITHEADS. Do your fucking homework. He did not say Osama Bin Laden. He said "ABU NIDAL". Gore was NOT on that panel. As for the Atta story...IT WAS A DIFFERENT ATTA, MORON! FUCKINGGODAMSTUPID MOTHERFUCKERS. FUCK. Look, read my other posts, you'll see where I stand. I am NOT a liberal in any sense of the word. I am educated, and I do my fucking homework. STOP SPREADING LIES.
I have parental duties at the moment, but rest assured in two things: I greatly appreciate the genuine response, and I will be giving your post thought. I hope you won't mind if I continue this conversation further when I have something concise and substantial to say-hopefully soon ;^).
You are missing the point. An illustration is not a proof, and thus has no bearing on the argument I am presenting. If an illustration doesn't help you understand the argument, you should disregard the illustration, not the argument. Oh well. I'm going to respond to the other response now, after I give it due thought. Have a nice day.
One more thing, actually, If you're going to make a reference, it would be good to clear it up, rather than presume that I think it's important enough to google it.