Better still: Live close to the office if you have the option. The less distance you have to travel, the less chance something will happen along that distance to screw up your commute.
- Reduce the human population by 90% (preferably using a humane manner; like fewer babies). Instead of 6 billion, you'll have 600 million. There will be plenty of resources for everyone to go around, and pollution will be decreased by 90% of current levels. Well, then, the solution is obvious. So obvious, in fact, that Jonathan Swift had it figured out quite a while ago.
That is and it isn't true. As someone who's often responsible for improvising harmonies to match a melody, it's quite possible to provide an interesting harmony to a boring melody and vice versa.
My personal favorite example here is the popular song "Turkey in the Straw". The traditional harmony goes something like this (assuming the key of C): verse: C-C-C-C-C-C-G-G-C-C-C-C-C-C-G-C chorus: C-C-C-C-F-F-F-F-C-C-C-C-C-C-G-C However, this is a very nice more complex harmony: verse: C-C-C-C-C-Am-Dm-G-C-G/D-C/E-C/E-F-D/F#-G-C chorus: C-C-C-C-F-F/E-Dm-G-C-D-D#dim-C/E-F-D/F#-G-C
The melody works either way, but the harmonies are quite different.
Slight disagreements about step 4: If your a friend of the president, then step 4 is in fact "Profit!!!". It's just that for everyone else, it's "Oh crap" as you stated.
You're missing a very important 20th century development in the history of both parties: the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. The reason this was critical is that prior to that period, the Democrats were the party of southern white racists (e.g. George Wallace), and undermining that base by creating the Civil Rights Act led directly to the Republican dominance of the southeastern US that continues to this day.
Before the 1980's, the USSR generally held the record on uses of vetos. Actually, through most of the Cold War the UN Security Council was deadlocked due to the US vetoing everything the USSR wanted and vice versa. The only reason the Korean War happened under UN auspices is that the Russian ambassador had left due to the Chinese seat being given to Taiwan rather than the Maoist PRC.
Most of what the US has vetoed has to do with preventing any condemnations of Israeli actions (I'm not implying any judgment about whether that was justified, just pointing out the fact).
This whole suspended animation thing would be wholly unnecessary if they had just supplied the cruise liner with the full complement of lemon-soaked paper napkins from the beginning.
I always went with a slightly more refined version of that theory: If the majority of the viewers or audience like something, that's good art. If the majority hate it, that's mediocre art. If the majority "don't understand it", that's lousy art.
My reasoning: If they hate something, then at least they understood it, so the artist got some sort of point across.
They definitely targeted Loyalists, who were subject to having their property confiscated, tarring and feathering, and in some cases were killed by the revolutionaries.
Another obviously nerdy congresscritter is Rush Holt from New Jersey's 12th district. Holt's notable efforts (many of which have shown up on/.) include going after unaccountable electronic voting and advocating network neutrality.
If they do that, they can't truthfully advertise themselves as an "Internet Service Provider", which should put a nice big dent in their business and possibly throw a wrench into their monopoly deals in the markets where people can't easily switch to DSL or other broadband providers. Plus the portal thing isn't as profitable as it might look: Just ask AOL. The Internet tends to view attempts to filter content as damage and routes around it, as the old saying goes.
And I don't buy that your ISP completely controls the information you see. Even if we take as given that they can control the entirety of what's visible to you over the Internet, they don't control your local NPR station or your local paper, and they definitely don't control what your friends and neighbors can say to you. Take off your tinfoil hat.
I would think that a really effective threat would be to take away their "common carrier" status and make Comcast legally responsible for all the traffic going through their network. For instance, since they actively manipulate their traffic, it can be argued they could stop all child pornography, copyrighted material, etc from traversing their network, and since they failed to do so they are liable for its distribution.
The author has a good point: mainstream media outlets focus far too much on the story and not the science, so much so that they will lie and equivocate to generate conflict. Yet, I would rather see a light science articles that are interesting and easy to read than none at all, as long as the science is actually correct.
The author has a good point: mainstream media outlets focus far too much on the story and not the facts, so much so that they will lie and equivocate to generate conflict.
Just generalizing a bit, but I believe it's justified (e.g. New York Times attack piece on John McCain). And AFAICT, the same outlets assume that their audience would rather see a light celebrity story that is interesting and easy to read than they would a detailed business or science story.
Slashdot Mirror
Better still: Live close to the office if you have the option. The less distance you have to travel, the less chance something will happen along that distance to screw up your commute.
- Reduce the human population by 90% (preferably using a humane manner; like fewer babies). Instead of 6 billion, you'll have 600 million. There will be plenty of resources for everyone to go around, and pollution will be decreased by 90% of current levels. Well, then, the solution is obvious. So obvious, in fact, that Jonathan Swift had it figured out quite a while ago.
It's not the size of your magnet that counts, it's how you use it!
That is and it isn't true. As someone who's often responsible for improvising harmonies to match a melody, it's quite possible to provide an interesting harmony to a boring melody and vice versa.
My personal favorite example here is the popular song "Turkey in the Straw". The traditional harmony goes something like this (assuming the key of C):
verse: C-C-C-C-C-C-G-G-C-C-C-C-C-C-G-C
chorus: C-C-C-C-F-F-F-F-C-C-C-C-C-C-G-C
However, this is a very nice more complex harmony:
verse: C-C-C-C-C-Am-Dm-G-C-G/D-C/E-C/E-F-D/F#-G-C
chorus: C-C-C-C-F-F/E-Dm-G-C-D-D#dim-C/E-F-D/F#-G-C
The melody works either way, but the harmonies are quite different.
Slight disagreements about step 4: If your a friend of the president, then step 4 is in fact "Profit!!!". It's just that for everyone else, it's "Oh crap" as you stated.
You're missing a very important 20th century development in the history of both parties: the aftermath of the Civil Rights Act. The reason this was critical is that prior to that period, the Democrats were the party of southern white racists (e.g. George Wallace), and undermining that base by creating the Civil Rights Act led directly to the Republican dominance of the southeastern US that continues to this day.
The real kicker is that the so-called "conservative" article is from the Associated Press, not Fox News. Fox simply passed it along.
My best guess on the "liberal" article is that concern about the state of urban school districts is a liberal issue, or something like that.
Is it possible to correctly attach this photon gun to a shark's head?
Except that they'll find that the original plans called for stones 36" tall rather than 36'.
The campaign page has a few more of the criticisms, but you're right that her biography page is carefully missing anything negative.
I'm thinking the right approach is to sic the Crimson Permanent Assurance on them.
Before the 1980's, the USSR generally held the record on uses of vetos. Actually, through most of the Cold War the UN Security Council was deadlocked due to the US vetoing everything the USSR wanted and vice versa. The only reason the Korean War happened under UN auspices is that the Russian ambassador had left due to the Chinese seat being given to Taiwan rather than the Maoist PRC.
Most of what the US has vetoed has to do with preventing any condemnations of Israeli actions (I'm not implying any judgment about whether that was justified, just pointing out the fact).
This whole suspended animation thing would be wholly unnecessary if they had just supplied the cruise liner with the full complement of lemon-soaked paper napkins from the beginning.
I always went with a slightly more refined version of that theory: If the majority of the viewers or audience like something, that's good art. If the majority hate it, that's mediocre art. If the majority "don't understand it", that's lousy art.
My reasoning: If they hate something, then at least they understood it, so the artist got some sort of point across.
They definitely targeted Loyalists, who were subject to having their property confiscated, tarring and feathering, and in some cases were killed by the revolutionaries.
How about a POV gun? That would probably do the trick.
Another obviously nerdy congresscritter is Rush Holt from New Jersey's 12th district. Holt's notable efforts (many of which have shown up on /.) include going after unaccountable electronic voting and advocating network neutrality.
The Watergate Committee definitely turned up some useful information.
For those like me who didn't know off the top of their head Ivan Stang created, he founded the Church of the SubGenius.
If they do that, they can't truthfully advertise themselves as an "Internet Service Provider", which should put a nice big dent in their business and possibly throw a wrench into their monopoly deals in the markets where people can't easily switch to DSL or other broadband providers. Plus the portal thing isn't as profitable as it might look: Just ask AOL. The Internet tends to view attempts to filter content as damage and routes around it, as the old saying goes.
And I don't buy that your ISP completely controls the information you see. Even if we take as given that they can control the entirety of what's visible to you over the Internet, they don't control your local NPR station or your local paper, and they definitely don't control what your friends and neighbors can say to you. Take off your tinfoil hat.
I would think that a really effective threat would be to take away their "common carrier" status and make Comcast legally responsible for all the traffic going through their network. For instance, since they actively manipulate their traffic, it can be argued they could stop all child pornography, copyrighted material, etc from traversing their network, and since they failed to do so they are liable for its distribution.
Just generalizing a bit, but I believe it's justified (e.g. New York Times attack piece on John McCain). And AFAICT, the same outlets assume that their audience would rather see a light celebrity story that is interesting and easy to read than they would a detailed business or science story.
Regardless of what the moderators seem to think, your point is valid.
That's OPE. But anyway, we don't want to start a nuclear flame war unless we really have to.