The solution has been staring everyone in the face since 9/11, and nobody wants to do it because, geez, we'd have to add $10 to every airticket, and that's taxation, and everyone hates taxes right?
The people who generally oppose new taxes on principle are NOT the people who supported federalizing airport security. The current system was supported by federal politicians who wanted to add a whole new army of workers to federal payrolls, who'd join federal labor unions, and pay union dues to chip into political campaigns.
Another good idea would be to hold airlines accountable for events like 9/11. Taxpayers REWARDED them for that debacle to the tune of $15 billion. WTF?!
You have to start charging company expenses to employees' credit cards.
Loki did not use their employees' credit cards. Loki did not use their employees' credit cards. Loki did not use their employees' credit cards. Do I need to say it again?
When most employees travel, they pay for things themselves, keep the receipts, and get reimbursed later. ALMOST EVERY COMPANY DOES THIS.
Yes, Loki failed to reimburse their employees. Yes, that is really horrible of them. But don't take one phrase in a frontpage blurb and turn it into a vision of Loki executives saying, "Say Jimmy, mind if we put some new servers on your Platinum Visa?"
The mob mentality on this site gets worse every day.
OK, in the new trailer that aired last night after Malcolm, right after Yoda says "In grave danger you are", there's something I can't believe. You see Obi-Wan jumping through some kind of press that's trying to crush him vertically. Didn't Lucas see GalaxyQuest?! As Sigourney Weaver would say, "This episode was badly written!"
I'm not looking forward to that day. If my computer gets 0wned, I might lose my saved email. If my toaster gets 0wned, I might lose my house. Think about it.
Treat our communications infrastructure the way we treat highways: a publicly funded transportation system that all users and providors use under the same conditions and restraints.
Interesting. I don't drive, yet every month I get money taken from me by force before I even get paid that goes to the highways. The private railroads pay taxes to that system too, which essentially amounts to funding their competition. The increasing use of cars and trucks as opposed to trains is bad for the environment. Therefore I'm paying to destroy the environment.
How many people in this country really see DSL as a basic human need? I bet half of those people have Slashdot accounts. We, a vocal and privileged minority, want the entire country to pay for our toy.
A few years playing bitch to bubba will make even the most arrogant CEO rather compliant.
There are some people who say that the desire to have everything run forcibly by central authority is symptomatic of a violent culture. I don't always agree with that, but when I see people grinning over the idea of using government to arrange the rape of those they dislike (who have committed no violent act), it frightens me. It reminds me of the vicious totalitarianism humanity thought it had defeated in the 20th century. But then again, all Hitler did was kill people - could we be the first state to sanction rape since kings lost the right of prima nocte?
The parent post worries me. If you don't know how to hit Google and type in "House of Representatives", how can you be so sure of your position on this bill?
I am seeing way too many kneejerk "Monopolies stink! More regulation!" posts on this story, and they remind me of the soccer moms who will vote for anyone who says "Think of the children!"
Please at least try to see both sides of an issue before you get involved in the political arena. All the information and opinions are online for those who want to read them.
Amen. It's amazing how governments can manipulate people with this cycle. Step 1: Add a bunch of new regulations, and call it deregulation. Step 2: Watch people get screwed over by the new system. Step 3: Say "Now you see that regulations need to be in place to protect you from problems like this." Step 4: Institute even stricter regulations.
Marketting seems to have devolved to pretty pictures.... the reason I buy something is because I have some information that makes me believe that my life will be improved in some fashion as a result of the purchase.
How will buying a ticket to a movie improve your life? Maybe because you'll get some enjoyment from the pretty pictures on the screen.
I think movies are going to have to start making two websites. Requiem for a Dream's web site got me thinking about this. It's a beautiful site that adapts the movie to the web medium well, but it's got no information. You'd think the makers of an independent film who have to struggle to pay the bills would want people to know where to see or buy the damn thing. Even the distributor, Artisan Entertainment, only linked to the above site.
I'm all for Flash as a medium for creative expression, but sometimes I just want some info on a white background.
it appears all those countries with 'socialist health systems' have better life expectancy rates than the US
It helps that those countries don't have the War on Drugs. It helps a whole lot.
BTW, how often do you lobby the US govt to privatise its socialist highway system?
As a member of a Rail Passengers Association, I do it all the time. Railroads would be a much more cost-efficient means of transportation for both people and freight if all the trucking companies and automobile drivers actually had to pay for the upkeep of the roads they use. It's also better for the environment (due to fuel efficiency) and much safer to transport hazardous material by rail.
Afterall increasing choice always makes things better - look at the 60 TV channels, that's much better than just having BBC 1, 2 & 3 & a couple of token private channels like they have in the UK.
For those who didn't read the parent post, he was being sarcastic. I've got some advice: Go through the Slashdot archives and look for stories about Comedy Central's South Park and Daily Show, or the Star Trek marathons on TNN, or any number of Fox shows, or the Food Network's Iron Chef, or the Cartoon Network's vast importation of Japanese cartoons. My favorite thing about modern TV is how you can always find a cable network like USA or TNT showing movies on the weekends. You may be too cool for TV, but a lot of us aren't. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that 2002 may be the best time in history to be a TV watcher.
(Although I'll grant you that NBC's Olympic coverage blows.)
Every time there's a report about the state of Canadian healthcare, it seems to come from some right wing "thinktank"--why do they call them that?--that has a vested interest in bringing down the system, so they can put a for-profit system in its place.
I hope you're trolling, but I fear you might actually be serious.
I had a quick look at this Fraser Institute's web site. It seems to me that they support:
It's easy to ignore the arguments that come from these groups when you characterize them as "right-wing" or "corporate apologists". My hometown newspaper likes to put Cato Institute articles in a special box marked "The Right Stuff - a forum for conservative opinion".
If someone's wrong, show me how they're wrong. Name-calling - i.e. "idiots" - doesn't prove a thing.
Your sig, however, is brilliant. I mean that. It says in seven words what I've been trying to tell politically-inclined people for years.
AMEN, brother! I was waiting for someone in this thread to summarize all the arguments against this horrible piece of legislation. As many commentators have pointed out, Shays-Meehan should be called the Incumbent Protection Act. For more on that, here's a letter I got printed in the Star-Ledger (a New Jersey newspaper) last week, with my favorite line in bold:
There is a fundamental conflict of interest when mainstream news outlets
such as the Star-Ledger editorialize in favor of campaign
finance restrictions. If citizens are prohibited by force from helping
candidates of their choice gain media exposure, the news media have
almost total control over what the public sees. Incumbent
candidates, in addition to the huge advantage of having recognizable
names, inevitably receive more media coverage than their
opponents. When incumbents are not seriously challenged at election time,
they lose an incentive to serve their constituents.
The real consequences
of increased campaign spending are more competitive elections and a
better-informed electorate, both vital ingredients to a free society.
It was Saturday. On weekdays when people are wasting time at work, the #1 picture has usually been sent over 100 times. But very rarely does a picture stay in the top spot for so long. (The last time I can think of that happening was during the summer of 2000 when there was a photo of Britney Spears falling out of her dress at an awards show.)
Except that the "Civil Rights Commission" and their cronies have yet to produce one person who was legally registered to vote and was turned away in Florida on November 7th, 2000. But hey, it's only 2002. I'm sure they'll find someone soon.
Oh my God, you noticed that during the Superbowl too? Let's see, the Taliban was the group in Afghanistan we destroyed for harboring and protecting terrorists, right? If I'm not mistaken, the US government sent the Taliban $73 million in January of 2001 to help destroy the Afghan heroin trade. So I propose a new slogan:
If you support the War on Drugs, might be supporting terrorism.
Hell, if this guy had mastered English at a 6th-grade level before starting his crusade, he'd have doubled his credibility. I'd say you start by sounding remotely intelligent.
Don't forget that it was not so long ago that Slashdot was very excited about X10 products. I consider them assholes now, less because of pop-unders (which were at least an innovation in advertising, less annoying than a lot of other methods of web advertising) but because they really seem to want to exploit the loneliness/horniness of geeks and encourage behavior that's almost universally considered immoral.
But being assholes doesn't imply the uselessness of their product, right? I can understand if you won't support them for moral reasons, but don't condemn their products' technical merits because of the company's behavior.
In my experiences, computers don't have a steady drift. They tend to lose time more under high use. So when Windows is f***ing up and everything is slow, I lose all kinds of time.
I hate to bury a question like this so low in a thread, but here goes: why is it that for $5 I can buy a Backstreet Boys (or whatever) wristwatch at K-Mart that will lose less than a minute each month, yet I pay thousands of dollars for computers and the clocks are useless if you don't run a program to update it CONSTANTLY? I'd love to learn how to wire a wristwatch into my CPU to be the clock....
Furthermore, I _would_ talk to guys at Radio Shack
My recent experiences at the Radio Shacks in downtown Philadelphia consist of walking in, finding what I need to buy, standing at the counter while the two clerks talk about what they're going to do that night for about 5 minutes, putting the item back on the shelf, and leaving to buy it somewhere else. These are not "techies".
a per-captia [sic] income comparable to that of a small country
Indeed, that line makes no sense at all. A small country doesn't necessarily have a large or small per-capita income. Sierra Leone and Ireland are relatively small countries, and very close in size. The per-capita GNP of Ireland is roughly 40 times that of Sierra Leone. I guess they meant "comparable to that of a poor country".
Slashdot Mirror
Another good idea would be to hold airlines accountable for events like 9/11. Taxpayers REWARDED them for that debacle to the tune of $15 billion. WTF?!
When most employees travel, they pay for things themselves, keep the receipts, and get reimbursed later. ALMOST EVERY COMPANY DOES THIS.
Yes, Loki failed to reimburse their employees. Yes, that is really horrible of them. But don't take one phrase in a frontpage blurb and turn it into a vision of Loki executives saying, "Say Jimmy, mind if we put some new servers on your Platinum Visa?"
The mob mentality on this site gets worse every day.
OK, in the new trailer that aired last night after Malcolm, right after Yoda says "In grave danger you are", there's something I can't believe. You see Obi-Wan jumping through some kind of press that's trying to crush him vertically. Didn't Lucas see GalaxyQuest?! As Sigourney Weaver would say, "This episode was badly written!"
How about, "the geekiest movie ever not directed by Kevin Smith"?
Correction: you can't do that in Windows Media Player.
Winamp and any other quality Windows application will be happy to play a file as it downloads.
I'm not looking forward to that day. If my computer gets 0wned, I might lose my saved email. If my toaster gets 0wned, I might lose my house. Think about it.
How many people in this country really see DSL as a basic human need? I bet half of those people have Slashdot accounts. We, a vocal and privileged minority, want the entire country to pay for our toy.
There are some people who say that the desire to have everything run forcibly by central authority is symptomatic of a violent culture. I don't always agree with that, but when I see people grinning over the idea of using government to arrange the rape of those they dislike (who have committed no violent act), it frightens me. It reminds me of the vicious totalitarianism humanity thought it had defeated in the 20th century. But then again, all Hitler did was kill people - could we be the first state to sanction rape since kings lost the right of prima nocte?
The parent post worries me. If you don't know how to hit Google and type in "House of Representatives", how can you be so sure of your position on this bill?
I am seeing way too many kneejerk "Monopolies stink! More regulation!" posts on this story, and they remind me of the soccer moms who will vote for anyone who says "Think of the children!"
Please at least try to see both sides of an issue before you get involved in the political arena. All the information and opinions are online for those who want to read them.
Amen. It's amazing how governments can manipulate people with this cycle. Step 1: Add a bunch of new regulations, and call it deregulation. Step 2: Watch people get screwed over by the new system. Step 3: Say "Now you see that regulations need to be in place to protect you from problems like this." Step 4: Institute even stricter regulations.
Ugh.
Marketting seems to have devolved to pretty pictures.... the reason I buy something is because I have some information that makes me believe that my life will be improved in some fashion as a result of the purchase.
How will buying a ticket to a movie improve your life? Maybe because you'll get some enjoyment from the pretty pictures on the screen.
I think movies are going to have to start making two websites. Requiem for a Dream's web site got me thinking about this. It's a beautiful site that adapts the movie to the web medium well, but it's got no information. You'd think the makers of an independent film who have to struggle to pay the bills would want people to know where to see or buy the damn thing. Even the distributor, Artisan Entertainment, only linked to the above site.
I'm all for Flash as a medium for creative expression, but sometimes I just want some info on a white background.
that lock fonts using CSS should be tied down while the tendons are ripped....
My old Slashdot sig had a simpler idea. Deprive every web designer of oxygen until his or her main page loads. If they die, they deserve it.
Just a few points here....
it appears all those countries with 'socialist health systems' have better life expectancy rates than the US
It helps that those countries don't have the War on Drugs. It helps a whole lot.
BTW, how often do you lobby the US govt to privatise its socialist highway system?
As a member of a Rail Passengers Association, I do it all the time. Railroads would be a much more cost-efficient means of transportation for both people and freight if all the trucking companies and automobile drivers actually had to pay for the upkeep of the roads they use. It's also better for the environment (due to fuel efficiency) and much safer to transport hazardous material by rail.
Afterall increasing choice always makes things better - look at the 60 TV channels, that's much better than just having BBC 1, 2 & 3 & a couple of token private channels like they have in the UK.
For those who didn't read the parent post, he was being sarcastic. I've got some advice: Go through the Slashdot archives and look for stories about Comedy Central's South Park and Daily Show, or the Star Trek marathons on TNN, or any number of Fox shows, or the Food Network's Iron Chef, or the Cartoon Network's vast importation of Japanese cartoons. My favorite thing about modern TV is how you can always find a cable network like USA or TNT showing movies on the weekends. You may be too cool for TV, but a lot of us aren't. In fact, I'd go so far as to say that 2002 may be the best time in history to be a TV watcher.
(Although I'll grant you that NBC's Olympic coverage blows.)
I hope you're trolling, but I fear you might actually be serious.
I had a quick look at this Fraser Institute's web site. It seems to me that they support:
This sounds like a set of Your Rights Online articles!
It's easy to ignore the arguments that come from these groups when you characterize them as "right-wing" or "corporate apologists". My hometown newspaper likes to put Cato Institute articles in a special box marked "The Right Stuff - a forum for conservative opinion".
If someone's wrong, show me how they're wrong. Name-calling - i.e. "idiots" - doesn't prove a thing.
Your sig, however, is brilliant. I mean that. It says in seven words what I've been trying to tell politically-inclined people for years.
It was Saturday. On weekdays when people are wasting time at work, the #1 picture has usually been sent over 100 times. But very rarely does a picture stay in the top spot for so long. (The last time I can think of that happening was during the summer of 2000 when there was a photo of Britney Spears falling out of her dress at an awards show.)
Well, it wouldn't be too difficult, considering that this picture has been the #1 most-emailed photo on Yahoo News for over two weeks now.
Except that the "Civil Rights Commission" and their cronies have yet to produce one person who was legally registered to vote and was turned away in Florida on November 7th, 2000. But hey, it's only 2002. I'm sure they'll find someone soon.
If you support the War on Drugs, might be supporting terrorism.
(And that's not to mention Colombia at all....)
Maybe he has an unsorted phonebook. Then you have no option but linear search.
You are a good man.
Don't forget that it was not so long ago that Slashdot was very excited about X10 products. I consider them assholes now, less because of pop-unders (which were at least an innovation in advertising, less annoying than a lot of other methods of web advertising) but because they really seem to want to exploit the loneliness/horniness of geeks and encourage behavior that's almost universally considered immoral.
But being assholes doesn't imply the uselessness of their product, right? I can understand if you won't support them for moral reasons, but don't condemn their products' technical merits because of the company's behavior.
In my experiences, computers don't have a steady drift. They tend to lose time more under high use. So when Windows is f***ing up and everything is slow, I lose all kinds of time.
I hate to bury a question like this so low in a thread, but here goes: why is it that for $5 I can buy a Backstreet Boys (or whatever) wristwatch at K-Mart that will lose less than a minute each month, yet I pay thousands of dollars for computers and the clocks are useless if you don't run a program to update it CONSTANTLY? I'd love to learn how to wire a wristwatch into my CPU to be the clock....