Also, fingerprints are per se not exactly unique. Ask the lawyer who was misidentified as a terrorist for having similar fingerprint features.
There is nothing in your linked article that states they misidentified someone because the fingerprints of both individuals were the same or were, per se, the same. The problem was the poor quality of the latent and that caused the match to be with a terrorist. They still had a unique match.
I actually like Weblogic over JBoss. The last time I used JBoss it didn't have a nice console GUI like Weblogic does. Therefore I could manage WL easier and I was more efficient at it than with JBoss. I eventually would just edit the XML files for Weblogic by hand for some things. As for Tuxedo, that's a load of crap. They are both overpriced I think but at least Weblogic is almost worth it. The problem with all their apps though is that they are bloated. I installed their ESB product (AquaLogic) along with Weblogic which meant I had multiple JVMs running and over a gigabyte (maybe 2GB, it's been a while since I setup the sandbox) of RAM being used. I didn't even have any custom apps deployed (just samples).
I had to look up ATF (I'm not from 'round there). BATF - Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. Interesting combination. I don't know where to start taking the piss.
FYI, although the ATF is a bureau like the FBI, for some reason the B is routinely left off their abbreviation. Not only that, but they also handle (in a good way) explosives now so they are actually known as ATFE, or for those who are not from 'round here, BATFE.
I've never used Linspire, but in terms of licensing file formats such as Quicktime and Windows Media, I think they're on the right track. People want an OS that works out of the box, and that includes media tasks. If it doesn't the average user has very little patience to make it work right.
When is the last time you saw Quicktime get installed by Windows alongside WMP or preinstalled by the vendor on a PC alongside Windows as a value-added item?
The only way that seemed possible was if we were traveling at speeds close to c, but that didn't sound feasible since we were observing objects that were moving away from us, in all directions. Then another weird thought occurred to me...
Just so you know, space can expand at, or faster, than the speed of light while objects *within* space can not move at the speed of light. I believe that space is actually expanding faster than light and our horizon will continue losing objects as galaxies and stars at the edge of our horizon are pushed past that horizon because the space they are in is expanding so fast. Those objects however are not moving in (or is the term 'through'?, I forget) space at anything close to c.
Our observed universe is self-contained within the event horizon of a giant black hole.
We would be instantly ripped apart by the gravity created by the black hole (i.e. we couldn't survive). We can't even survive the gravity on another planet like Jupiter let alone that of a black hole, especially one that would surround the entire universe.
One other observation that lends to this possibility is the fact that we have not seen evidence of other "Big Bangs" or other "Universes". If the Big Bang happened once, shouldn't it be a repeatable occurrence in the limitless void of space?
The Big Bang created space so based on that the answer would be no. The Big Bang is the only time the conservation of mass and energy could ever be violated. It's hard to imagine but before the Big Bang there was *nothing*, not even space. Also, space is not the 'limitless void' you think it is. The Higgs boson is thought to permeate space (that boson is thought to give objects mass) and there are also quantum fluctuations in space (and because they are quantum they can't be easily detected).
but I don't see any video of it flying/exploding. I saw multiple pictures of it on the ground but no video despite the/. submission and the article both saying "here is the video" and the link goes to still pics. Does anyone have the video link? Like I said, maybe I missed it and it really is there but I didn't see it.
Well, that explains why Republicans don't believe in evolution; it occurs too slowly for them to notice.
The Democrats always make fun of the Republicans for having faith in something that can't be seen and yet there are Democrats who believe in evolution. Weird! Oh, and hypocritical too. And if you think evolutionary evidence can be seen, there are millions of Republicans who will tell you they see a great deal of evidence that God exists.
Using the term "evolutionary rate" is pretty misleading: whats happening is that the genomes are changing faster, but almost all of that change isn't from any selective pressure. Its mostly "neutral drift", things changing randomly in a way that does not impact the fitness of the organism.
This only decreases the likelihood that evolution is actually real because it decreases the odds of human life developing by chance. It decreases the odds by allowing life to not only acquire a change that is advantageous but also disadvantageous thereby 'devolving' sometimes because of oscillations. I'm still waiting for scientists to create life (out of non-living material) on purpose but it must be possible if we are here, even if by accident (see my sig), right?...Right? Maybe once that happens we can finally have an example of what a complete (stage by stage) evolutionary path looks like because obviously the path that exists now is far from complete but why should that prevent some people from still thinking there are no blanks to even fill in and conclude evolution is real despite the holes?
For $DEITY's sake, the freaking RAZR sold for around $500 (with contract) at launch. Three months later, it was $100. Now, it's bloody free. Should I sue because I paid money for the RAZR when I could have gotten for free later? How about the Blackberry? That used to be $500.
Although you are right as far as the V3's price drop actually happening, you are exaggerating its speed and magnitude. The Razr sold for about $500 at launch (sometime during 2004) however it took at least a couple years for it to even reach half that price. I bought mine in November of 2005 and with a 2 year contract it was about $225 I believe and that is the original model which doesn't have the frills the other models did. Only in the last 6 months (3 years after launch) have prices been around $50-$100 with a contract.
What the hell does dislike have to do with anything? I dislike vanilla ice cream. That hardly means I want it banned or curtailed.
That is true, however, that's where we get into other opinions of that lifestyle, namely that the majority of the US population believes it is immoral.
What's there to like or dislike about homosexuals? They're people, like football fans, Communists and pet owners. What, someone doesn't like what they do in bed? People of every stripe do lots of things in bed. What, they don't like them trying to fight for some rights? The history of the Western World over the last few centuries is about groups trying to define and achieve some level of equality with the majority, and of at least some members of the majority trying to define away or minimize their concerns.
Their lifestyle is one thing to dislike about them. The fact that they are going against the natural order of life and it was the natural order then it would be possible for humans to procreate with 2 members of the same sex. Since that isn't possible it is clearly unnatural. Why make a big fuss over something done in the privacy of someone's home? Because many members of the homosexual community are outspoken about their lifestyle and *expect* others to accept it. No other is under any obligation to accept anything that someone else believes in voluntarily. Of course, you try explaining that to them and they call you a homophobe. There is a difference between vying for equality for something you can't help (e.g. race, gender) and vying for equality over something you have chosen voluntarily (forget the crap about being born "that way").
In addition, there is a difference between vying for equality and just outright demanding people accept the reason for your seeming lack of "inequality". The people who are homosexual are still male or female, still white or black (or something else), so they already have equality in society because of those factors. Forcing people to give them equality for something they did voluntarily is unwarranted. Where will it stop? When will people who participate in bestiality and who want to marry their dog start wanting the legal right to do so and have the dog fall under insurance coverage as a spouse? Without marriage being clearly defined (American weddings have a religious foundation afterall whether people like that or not [although some ceremonies are strictly civil]) as between a man and a woman the floodgates can be opened to all sorts of marital combinations.
While I sometimes think accusing political homophobes of being closet homosexuals,...
You *do* realize it is possible to not like something (and be opposed to it) without being scared of it right? I don't like cauliflower but I'm not a lachanophobe. It seems "homophobe!" is the only response someone, who is either in support of homosexuality or is a homosexual himself/herself, can give when confronted with opposition to their view. Those people aren't very creative when it comes to their defense, not to mention that in many cases it isn't even accurate: dislike != fear.
Well, right there that saves you on average $250 (car payment) + $150 (monthly comprehensive insurance) + $75 (gasoline) = $475 every month and easily more depending on your car. My car payment is $485 and that's only for something that costs $30k and with borrowing $28k.
You don't mention what you pay in rent/house payment and I really can't even guess since you are in Europe. I pay $425/mo. in rent right now for a 1.5 bedroom apartment. For an $80k house I'd pay about the same amount in a mortgage payment for 30 years.
I budget $300 a month for food. I spend on average $4 everyday when I'm at work for lunch and then another $80 every 2-2.5 weeks for groceries (I buy a lot of fast food; I don't like cooking nor can I do anything fancy). That can usually include eating out a couple times too on weekends. Percentage-wise, that's less than what you spend but I don't have a girlfriend at the present time but still go out sometimes with my ex.
Basically, about 72% of my net paycheck goes to bills. My utility bills (electric, water, sewage, garbage) amount to 5% of my monthly paycheck. Cable/internet is another $105, cell phone is $55, I have a sportbike so that's another $150 a month and my total insurance each month is about $185 (comprehensive on both car and bike).
I don't buy movies, CDs, consoles, or spend a ton on my computer (I upgrade once every 2 years) and, like you, I buy a book or 2 a year (I download lots of [free to me] ebooks but I haven't read hardly any of them). With my insurance, car payment, motorcycle payment and gas for both vehicles I spend about $1050 more than you every month. If I reduce my bills to something similar to yours by taking out vehicle costs I end up only using about 35% of my net paycheck every month. Those percentages will soon change though as I have another offer from a company that will increase my salary about 30%. I will move from an "engineer" title to a "consultant" title providing oversight to other engineers in the IT industry (government contractor). For reference, I have a BS in CS and live in an eastern state that is traditionally not known for IT. In a sense, I'm happy with my salary as it stands now, however I want the ability to save more while still living comfortably with the toys I want. YMMV
The $500 million mentioned in your linked article is not just for VCF. It was for the "agency's major technology projects". The money wasted on VCF wasn't actually totally wasted. I believe I read a while back that $45 million was hardware costs and much of that hardware was reused, obviously some of the money spent was on labor and that can't be recuperated. Also, the FBI wasn't totally at fault. SAIC could be blamed just as much. The FBI didn't mess it on purpose either as they were changing management too much on the VCF project which made requirements change as each manager wanted to do their own thing. The failure on their part was a side effect of changing management personnel as often as they did.
Is a lousy $16 million contract news? Give me a break. Most big companies sneeze $16 million in IT expenses every day.
Not really news but it made headlines anyway. The CJIS division houses more than just fingerprints and criminal history data and does more than background checks for firearms. There are a couple dozen systems there and each undergoes some level of upgrade almost every year. Many of those fall under the same contract. Some, like in this case, are their own contract. Compared to the other contracts I know about (I work as a subcontractor for LM in the CJIS environment) this is indeed miniscule but it is needed because as the article states, the Superdomes have been in place since about 2003 (depending on the system). The article states that the Sentinenl contract (successor to VCF) is a $423 million contract which is big for the CJIS environment. As an aside, the article has a typo at the end, the end date for Sentinel is probably 2011, not 2001. Anyway, the PA-RISC processor is already end-of-life as HP is moving towards Itanium but with the speed of contracts, projects, and government all combined together, the Superdomes got installed anyway and have needed an upgrade for a long time.
User replaceable battery - one big DUH. When your average CxO decides to talk on his phone all weekend, it is a nice thing for him/her to carry an extra battery.
I don't care how good of a CxO he/she is, the person isn't going to talk all 48 hours of the weekend. Bring a battery charger and use it at night. Problem solved. Barring that, the CxO should be able to swing an entire 2nd iPhone as a backup which would work as long as the SIM card can be swapped so the phone # can be moved to the backup phone.
If you make all possible ways of achieving a task illegal, then it is illegal to achieve that task, no matter how you wish to play with your words.
Once someone takes one for the rest of us (read: Germans, because I'm American) and gets caught for making software that circumvents, for example, Macrovision, then the rest of us can use that circumvention technique to actually perform a still legal act, that being copying the actual protected content, which would no longer be protected. This assumes the use, not the creation, of the circumvention technique is not illegal.
Store Clerk: Fine, what price should I put on it?
Store Manager: One and one sixth of a dollar and fourteen halves of a cent.
Store Clerk:..... We need a new price label gun.
I hope you have extra staff on hand for when any of your customers, who work for Verizon, come into the store.
I thought Apple was a religion.
But then most religions exist to make money/fleece the err customers.
I think you have religions confused with companies. Oh, you don't like that blanket statement? You shouldn't have made one yourself even if it was a "joke".
I'm sure everyone would like it if their opponents just resigned from the game. Unfortunately for you, there are enough people that view theocracy as injustice to make it quite unlikely that all of us will resign.
Well I guess viewing the US's theocracy as an injustice is strictly a problem created by those people who view it as injustice. In and of itself it is not a problem because it still isn't a state-sponsored religion despite everything in your being wanting it to be such. Just because the US government recognizes that God exists doesn't mean you have to do so as well. You may not like what they base their laws on but I think we all agree that murder should be a crime and I don't see why you should be able to pick and choose what laws Man should have that are based on God's laws. You may not like your particular state creating laws that negatively affect you and you can either move to another state that doesn't have that law or attempt to have it abolished but the majority will fight it tooth and nail (assuming in that example the majority want the law). You can fight the fact that the US government and its laws are based on a religion but they are not causing your specific religion (or lack thereof if that is the case) to be altered in doing so. That is a difference you (and many others) fail to recognize. You are free to practice or not practice your religion and you will not be treated differently. You seem to want people to respect your choice but you can't respect the choices made when forming the US government.
The Founding Fathers were a mix of Deists and Atheists. None was a Christian in the sense of today's fundamentalism. Suggestion that the word "Creator" implies a particular religious dogma, especially one that did not exist at the time of the country's founding, is absurd!
What is absurd is that blanket statement. At the least, "Creator" implies something other than an atheist's point of view that no Creator even exists in the first place so the assumption that an atheist would even mention a "Creator" is absurd. It is true that the Founding Fathers weren't all part of the same denomination but they still had a common religious foundation, that being Christianity. Christianity existed quite a few centuries before the country's founding and quite long enough for many of the Founding Fathers to have heard about it and to be a part of that religion.
I can't speak for the fellow you replied to, but I can tell you why I have a problem with religionists in the USA. It is because they have employed the legal and political systems to impose their beliefs, and behaviors based upon their beliefs, and symbols based upon their beliefs, and declarations based upon their beliefs, upon those who do not share them one of whom, of course, is me.
The legal and political systems, last I checked, do not require you, an atheist, to change your lack of religion. Not only do they not require that but they do not attach any consequence if you change your beliefs. Explain to me where you feel this imposition comes from. Before you answer, realize that the freedom of religiongranted in this country actually does include people like you who do not follow any religion. You have been able to hold on to that right up until now just as I have been able to hold on to mine right to have a religion. Also realize that I do not get special privileges for being a Christian (if anything I have to put up with religious bigotry like your own) and you do not get persecuted for your beliefs. Your choice to not follow a religion is not being impinged upon just because a certain religion's visibility in society is a little higher than you would prefer. In other countries you probably wouldn't actually be so lucky if your views differed from what seems to you like a state-sponsored religion so remember there is a difference between the US and countries with real state-sponsored religion. I think that is the key to your whole issue.
For instance, I can't purchase liquor on Sunday; heck, in some places, I can't even shop. My money declares my (completely non-existent) trust in your deity.
Actually money does not do that. The money declares trust in God for those who already believe in Him. It doesn't change whether you trust Him or not. You are free to ignore it as you do everyday just as I do much of the time and I'm a Christian. I don't feel those words are staring me down everyday just because they are there so they shouldn't be bothering you so much if you don't believe in anything they mean anyway. Having those words there are a good thing but they aren't on my mind every second of the day either. Do you not have better things to do with your time?
The country's very oath invokes the Christian god. The pledge of allegiance, something I don't otherwise have a problem with, is now layered with Christian sentiments that literally poison my otherwise highly patriotic willingness to give of myself.
Yeah it's funny how the country founded on religious freedom by Christian (of various denominations) people invokes God's name. If you don't like a country founded on religious freedom (freedom meaning you are not persecuted for differing views, see my first paragraph) you are free to go to a country that really does have state-sponsored religion so you can see what it really is and what it really feels like. This link should help you pick one out.
The expectation in the courtroom is that I swear to god; if I don't, I am literally putting my future at risk. My own taxes are being directly funneled into "faith-based initiatives."
Again, if you don't like a country that has a religious foundation you are free to go somewhere else. And don't give me any crap about how this country has a secular foundation. Our Founding Fathers put it in writing with various phrases such as this one: we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Anyway, you can still lie even after taking that oath in the courtroom whether you believe in God or not so what's the big deal? In many cases (no pun intended) now, a witness does not have to take part in a swearing-in session but is instead notified by the judge that whatever they say has to be the truth and i
As far as I am concerned, the various religions are a subset of cases within superstition; I would not class astrology as religion, but I do think it slots perfectly into superstition. The same goes for ghosts, all classes of magic that are not simply misunderstood natural events, homeopathy, anthropocentric views in general (religion is that in specific), and a host of others from phrenology to past lives. Creationism itself is a subset of religion.
One of the problems with your categorization of religion as superstition is that religion isn't just about believing in something that can't be seen directly. Religion provides guidance for living and interacting with others. It provides advice on complex topics as well as an overarching goal of providing something better than what this material world provides.
Obviously to believe in superstition takes faith that what you think is true really is true given some form of evidence and not just blind faith with no evidence. People of the Christian religion don't blindly believe God exists. They view the entire universe as evidence that God exists because how else do you get something out of nothing? There are other things too that they feel provide evidence and it isn't their responsibility to prove to you or anyone else that they are right (and I know you feel they are wrong). Judging them to be quacks, lunatics, or insane just shows how ignorant *you* are not to mention that you feel a need to spout off at someone else to make yourself feel superior over someone that has done nothing to you, basically like an 8th grade bully. If that helps you sleep better at night then I'm sure your parents are proud. I don't see them calling evolutionists quacks, lunatics, or insane despite the fact I'm sure they are thinking that. I guess that shows where the true superiority is.
By the way, Creationism isn't a subset of religion because that would imply there is only 1 religion and there isn't. Creationism is how millions of people believe the universe came into existence but there are millions more who have different views (or no views at all) that belong to other religions. You are taking a very unilateral approach with that statement because only Christians believe in the Creationism to which you are referring. As far as what the article submission stated, intelligent design is not the same as creationism.
And the second is currently defined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom. This definition refers to a caesium atom at rest at a temperature of 0 K (absolute zero). The ground state is defined at zero magnetic field.
Slashdot Mirror
There is nothing in your linked article that states they misidentified someone because the fingerprints of both individuals were the same or were, per se, the same. The problem was the poor quality of the latent and that caused the match to be with a terrorist. They still had a unique match.
I actually like Weblogic over JBoss. The last time I used JBoss it didn't have a nice console GUI like Weblogic does. Therefore I could manage WL easier and I was more efficient at it than with JBoss. I eventually would just edit the XML files for Weblogic by hand for some things. As for Tuxedo, that's a load of crap. They are both overpriced I think but at least Weblogic is almost worth it. The problem with all their apps though is that they are bloated. I installed their ESB product (AquaLogic) along with Weblogic which meant I had multiple JVMs running and over a gigabyte (maybe 2GB, it's been a while since I setup the sandbox) of RAM being used. I didn't even have any custom apps deployed (just samples).
You sure you want to use an IP address once IPv6 is fully implemented? We might be on our deathbed by then, but still.
FYI, although the ATF is a bureau like the FBI, for some reason the B is routinely left off their abbreviation. Not only that, but they also handle (in a good way) explosives now so they are actually known as ATFE, or for those who are not from 'round here, BATFE.
When is the last time you saw Quicktime get installed by Windows alongside WMP or preinstalled by the vendor on a PC alongside Windows as a value-added item?
Just so you know, space can expand at, or faster, than the speed of light while objects *within* space can not move at the speed of light. I believe that space is actually expanding faster than light and our horizon will continue losing objects as galaxies and stars at the edge of our horizon are pushed past that horizon because the space they are in is expanding so fast. Those objects however are not moving in (or is the term 'through'?, I forget) space at anything close to c.
Our observed universe is self-contained within the event horizon of a giant black hole.We would be instantly ripped apart by the gravity created by the black hole (i.e. we couldn't survive). We can't even survive the gravity on another planet like Jupiter let alone that of a black hole, especially one that would surround the entire universe.
One other observation that lends to this possibility is the fact that we have not seen evidence of other "Big Bangs" or other "Universes". If the Big Bang happened once, shouldn't it be a repeatable occurrence in the limitless void of space?The Big Bang created space so based on that the answer would be no. The Big Bang is the only time the conservation of mass and energy could ever be violated. It's hard to imagine but before the Big Bang there was *nothing*, not even space. Also, space is not the 'limitless void' you think it is. The Higgs boson is thought to permeate space (that boson is thought to give objects mass) and there are also quantum fluctuations in space (and because they are quantum they can't be easily detected).
but I don't see any video of it flying/exploding. I saw multiple pictures of it on the ground but no video despite the /. submission and the article both saying "here is the video" and the link goes to still pics. Does anyone have the video link? Like I said, maybe I missed it and it really is there but I didn't see it.
The article says .07 AU, not 0.7AU. Big difference (but your mileage is correct).
Columbus Day was anything to get excited over. When is the Columbus Day holiday season over, next Tuesday? Better question is, when did it start?
From the article:
This holiday season is shaping up to be one of the most exciting for PC gamers in years with dozens of highly anticipated PC games set to be released.The Democrats always make fun of the Republicans for having faith in something that can't be seen and yet there are Democrats who believe in evolution. Weird! Oh, and hypocritical too. And if you think evolutionary evidence can be seen, there are millions of Republicans who will tell you they see a great deal of evidence that God exists.
This only decreases the likelihood that evolution is actually real because it decreases the odds of human life developing by chance. It decreases the odds by allowing life to not only acquire a change that is advantageous but also disadvantageous thereby 'devolving' sometimes because of oscillations. I'm still waiting for scientists to create life (out of non-living material) on purpose but it must be possible if we are here, even if by accident (see my sig), right?...Right? Maybe once that happens we can finally have an example of what a complete (stage by stage) evolutionary path looks like because obviously the path that exists now is far from complete but why should that prevent some people from still thinking there are no blanks to even fill in and conclude evolution is real despite the holes?
Although you are right as far as the V3's price drop actually happening, you are exaggerating its speed and magnitude. The Razr sold for about $500 at launch (sometime during 2004) however it took at least a couple years for it to even reach half that price. I bought mine in November of 2005 and with a 2 year contract it was about $225 I believe and that is the original model which doesn't have the frills the other models did. Only in the last 6 months (3 years after launch) have prices been around $50-$100 with a contract.
That is true, however, that's where we get into other opinions of that lifestyle, namely that the majority of the US population believes it is immoral.
What's there to like or dislike about homosexuals? They're people, like football fans, Communists and pet owners. What, someone doesn't like what they do in bed? People of every stripe do lots of things in bed. What, they don't like them trying to fight for some rights? The history of the Western World over the last few centuries is about groups trying to define and achieve some level of equality with the majority, and of at least some members of the majority trying to define away or minimize their concerns.Their lifestyle is one thing to dislike about them. The fact that they are going against the natural order of life and it was the natural order then it would be possible for humans to procreate with 2 members of the same sex. Since that isn't possible it is clearly unnatural. Why make a big fuss over something done in the privacy of someone's home? Because many members of the homosexual community are outspoken about their lifestyle and *expect* others to accept it. No other is under any obligation to accept anything that someone else believes in voluntarily. Of course, you try explaining that to them and they call you a homophobe. There is a difference between vying for equality for something you can't help (e.g. race, gender) and vying for equality over something you have chosen voluntarily (forget the crap about being born "that way").
In addition, there is a difference between vying for equality and just outright demanding people accept the reason for your seeming lack of "inequality". The people who are homosexual are still male or female, still white or black (or something else), so they already have equality in society because of those factors. Forcing people to give them equality for something they did voluntarily is unwarranted. Where will it stop? When will people who participate in bestiality and who want to marry their dog start wanting the legal right to do so and have the dog fall under insurance coverage as a spouse? Without marriage being clearly defined (American weddings have a religious foundation afterall whether people like that or not [although some ceremonies are strictly civil]) as between a man and a woman the floodgates can be opened to all sorts of marital combinations.
You *do* realize it is possible to not like something (and be opposed to it) without being scared of it right? I don't like cauliflower but I'm not a lachanophobe. It seems "homophobe!" is the only response someone, who is either in support of homosexuality or is a homosexual himself/herself, can give when confronted with opposition to their view. Those people aren't very creative when it comes to their defense, not to mention that in many cases it isn't even accurate: dislike != fear.
Well, right there that saves you on average $250 (car payment) + $150 (monthly comprehensive insurance) + $75 (gasoline) = $475 every month and easily more depending on your car. My car payment is $485 and that's only for something that costs $30k and with borrowing $28k.
You don't mention what you pay in rent/house payment and I really can't even guess since you are in Europe. I pay $425/mo. in rent right now for a 1.5 bedroom apartment. For an $80k house I'd pay about the same amount in a mortgage payment for 30 years.
I budget $300 a month for food. I spend on average $4 everyday when I'm at work for lunch and then another $80 every 2-2.5 weeks for groceries (I buy a lot of fast food; I don't like cooking nor can I do anything fancy). That can usually include eating out a couple times too on weekends. Percentage-wise, that's less than what you spend but I don't have a girlfriend at the present time but still go out sometimes with my ex.
Basically, about 72% of my net paycheck goes to bills. My utility bills (electric, water, sewage, garbage) amount to 5% of my monthly paycheck. Cable/internet is another $105, cell phone is $55, I have a sportbike so that's another $150 a month and my total insurance each month is about $185 (comprehensive on both car and bike).
I don't buy movies, CDs, consoles, or spend a ton on my computer (I upgrade once every 2 years) and, like you, I buy a book or 2 a year (I download lots of [free to me] ebooks but I haven't read hardly any of them). With my insurance, car payment, motorcycle payment and gas for both vehicles I spend about $1050 more than you every month. If I reduce my bills to something similar to yours by taking out vehicle costs I end up only using about 35% of my net paycheck every month. Those percentages will soon change though as I have another offer from a company that will increase my salary about 30%. I will move from an "engineer" title to a "consultant" title providing oversight to other engineers in the IT industry (government contractor). For reference, I have a BS in CS and live in an eastern state that is traditionally not known for IT. In a sense, I'm happy with my salary as it stands now, however I want the ability to save more while still living comfortably with the toys I want. YMMV
The $500 million mentioned in your linked article is not just for VCF. It was for the "agency's major technology projects". The money wasted on VCF wasn't actually totally wasted. I believe I read a while back that $45 million was hardware costs and much of that hardware was reused, obviously some of the money spent was on labor and that can't be recuperated. Also, the FBI wasn't totally at fault. SAIC could be blamed just as much. The FBI didn't mess it on purpose either as they were changing management too much on the VCF project which made requirements change as each manager wanted to do their own thing. The failure on their part was a side effect of changing management personnel as often as they did.
Not really news but it made headlines anyway. The CJIS division houses more than just fingerprints and criminal history data and does more than background checks for firearms. There are a couple dozen systems there and each undergoes some level of upgrade almost every year. Many of those fall under the same contract. Some, like in this case, are their own contract. Compared to the other contracts I know about (I work as a subcontractor for LM in the CJIS environment) this is indeed miniscule but it is needed because as the article states, the Superdomes have been in place since about 2003 (depending on the system). The article states that the Sentinenl contract (successor to VCF) is a $423 million contract which is big for the CJIS environment. As an aside, the article has a typo at the end, the end date for Sentinel is probably 2011, not 2001. Anyway, the PA-RISC processor is already end-of-life as HP is moving towards Itanium but with the speed of contracts, projects, and government all combined together, the Superdomes got installed anyway and have needed an upgrade for a long time.
I don't care how good of a CxO he/she is, the person isn't going to talk all 48 hours of the weekend. Bring a battery charger and use it at night. Problem solved. Barring that, the CxO should be able to swing an entire 2nd iPhone as a backup which would work as long as the SIM card can be swapped so the phone # can be moved to the backup phone.
Once someone takes one for the rest of us (read: Germans, because I'm American) and gets caught for making software that circumvents, for example, Macrovision, then the rest of us can use that circumvention technique to actually perform a still legal act, that being copying the actual protected content, which would no longer be protected. This assumes the use, not the creation, of the circumvention technique is not illegal.
I hope you have extra staff on hand for when any of your customers, who work for Verizon, come into the store.
I think you have religions confused with companies. Oh, you don't like that blanket statement? You shouldn't have made one yourself even if it was a "joke".
Well I guess viewing the US's theocracy as an injustice is strictly a problem created by those people who view it as injustice. In and of itself it is not a problem because it still isn't a state-sponsored religion despite everything in your being wanting it to be such. Just because the US government recognizes that God exists doesn't mean you have to do so as well. You may not like what they base their laws on but I think we all agree that murder should be a crime and I don't see why you should be able to pick and choose what laws Man should have that are based on God's laws. You may not like your particular state creating laws that negatively affect you and you can either move to another state that doesn't have that law or attempt to have it abolished but the majority will fight it tooth and nail (assuming in that example the majority want the law). You can fight the fact that the US government and its laws are based on a religion but they are not causing your specific religion (or lack thereof if that is the case) to be altered in doing so. That is a difference you (and many others) fail to recognize. You are free to practice or not practice your religion and you will not be treated differently. You seem to want people to respect your choice but you can't respect the choices made when forming the US government.
The Founding Fathers were a mix of Deists and Atheists. None was a Christian in the sense of today's fundamentalism. Suggestion that the word "Creator" implies a particular religious dogma, especially one that did not exist at the time of the country's founding, is absurd!What is absurd is that blanket statement. At the least, "Creator" implies something other than an atheist's point of view that no Creator even exists in the first place so the assumption that an atheist would even mention a "Creator" is absurd. It is true that the Founding Fathers weren't all part of the same denomination but they still had a common religious foundation, that being Christianity. Christianity existed quite a few centuries before the country's founding and quite long enough for many of the Founding Fathers to have heard about it and to be a part of that religion.
I can't speak for the fellow you replied to, but I can tell you why I have a problem with religionists in the USA. It is because they have employed the legal and political systems to impose their beliefs, and behaviors based upon their beliefs, and symbols based upon their beliefs, and declarations based upon their beliefs, upon those who do not share them one of whom, of course, is me.
The legal and political systems, last I checked, do not require you, an atheist, to change your lack of religion. Not only do they not require that but they do not attach any consequence if you change your beliefs. Explain to me where you feel this imposition comes from. Before you answer, realize that the freedom of religiongranted in this country actually does include people like you who do not follow any religion. You have been able to hold on to that right up until now just as I have been able to hold on to mine right to have a religion. Also realize that I do not get special privileges for being a Christian (if anything I have to put up with religious bigotry like your own) and you do not get persecuted for your beliefs. Your choice to not follow a religion is not being impinged upon just because a certain religion's visibility in society is a little higher than you would prefer. In other countries you probably wouldn't actually be so lucky if your views differed from what seems to you like a state-sponsored religion so remember there is a difference between the US and countries with real state-sponsored religion. I think that is the key to your whole issue.
For instance, I can't purchase liquor on Sunday; heck, in some places, I can't even shop. My money declares my (completely non-existent) trust in your deity.
Actually money does not do that. The money declares trust in God for those who already believe in Him. It doesn't change whether you trust Him or not. You are free to ignore it as you do everyday just as I do much of the time and I'm a Christian. I don't feel those words are staring me down everyday just because they are there so they shouldn't be bothering you so much if you don't believe in anything they mean anyway. Having those words there are a good thing but they aren't on my mind every second of the day either. Do you not have better things to do with your time?
The country's very oath invokes the Christian god. The pledge of allegiance, something I don't otherwise have a problem with, is now layered with Christian sentiments that literally poison my otherwise highly patriotic willingness to give of myself.
Yeah it's funny how the country founded on religious freedom by Christian (of various denominations) people invokes God's name. If you don't like a country founded on religious freedom (freedom meaning you are not persecuted for differing views, see my first paragraph) you are free to go to a country that really does have state-sponsored religion so you can see what it really is and what it really feels like. This link should help you pick one out.
The expectation in the courtroom is that I swear to god; if I don't, I am literally putting my future at risk. My own taxes are being directly funneled into "faith-based initiatives."
Again, if you don't like a country that has a religious foundation you are free to go somewhere else. And don't give me any crap about how this country has a secular foundation. Our Founding Fathers put it in writing with various phrases such as this one: we are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights. Anyway, you can still lie even after taking that oath in the courtroom whether you believe in God or not so what's the big deal? In many cases (no pun intended) now, a witness does not have to take part in a swearing-in session but is instead notified by the judge that whatever they say has to be the truth and i
One of the problems with your categorization of religion as superstition is that religion isn't just about believing in something that can't be seen directly. Religion provides guidance for living and interacting with others. It provides advice on complex topics as well as an overarching goal of providing something better than what this material world provides.
Obviously to believe in superstition takes faith that what you think is true really is true given some form of evidence and not just blind faith with no evidence. People of the Christian religion don't blindly believe God exists. They view the entire universe as evidence that God exists because how else do you get something out of nothing? There are other things too that they feel provide evidence and it isn't their responsibility to prove to you or anyone else that they are right (and I know you feel they are wrong). Judging them to be quacks, lunatics, or insane just shows how ignorant *you* are not to mention that you feel a need to spout off at someone else to make yourself feel superior over someone that has done nothing to you, basically like an 8th grade bully. If that helps you sleep better at night then I'm sure your parents are proud. I don't see them calling evolutionists quacks, lunatics, or insane despite the fact I'm sure they are thinking that. I guess that shows where the true superiority is.
By the way, Creationism isn't a subset of religion because that would imply there is only 1 religion and there isn't. Creationism is how millions of people believe the universe came into existence but there are millions more who have different views (or no views at all) that belong to other religions. You are taking a very unilateral approach with that statement because only Christians believe in the Creationism to which you are referring. As far as what the article submission stated, intelligent design is not the same as creationism.
And the second is currently defined as the duration of 9,192,631,770 periods of the radiation corresponding to the transition between the two hyperfine levels of the ground state of the caesium-133 atom. This definition refers to a caesium atom at rest at a temperature of 0 K (absolute zero). The ground state is defined at zero magnetic field.