And during that time Intel made sure that it was difficult to buy AMD powered machines from any of their long time partners. (I'm looking at you, Dell.)
"The article itself" is presenting the results of a scientific study. If you have problems with the methodology, then by all means present them! But to disregard the article because your feelings are hurt is disingenuous. Perhaps your family IS different, but as the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not data.
I don't see how this letter could do any damage whatsoever. It was informative and polite while simultaneously firm in stating the committment that most of the people that WORK on the internet feel.
So, the law requires the patient to submit to an invasive, medically unnecessary procedure in order to wave a picture of a fetus in the patient's face? And Republicans talk about their opponents as being in favor of "big government".
Atheism is the lack of a "theism"-- a belief in God. Would also say that people who lack belief in pink unicorns "operate on same level as believing in God"? Would you accuse these apinkunicornists of being part of a religion?
There is a universe of things that can be imagined but cannot be proven or disproven by the standards you put forth. It would be ridiculous to say that you're not being scientific if you fail to believe in every thing for which there is no proof.
Also, you're using the word agnostic incorrectly. You can be an agnostic atheist and indeed, that is what most atheists would affirm their beliefs as.
I have attempted to use activities and also find them completely useless. Ditto with nepomuk. I've TRIED to like them and just find them to be a waste of resources. And, if the hatred for the cashew is "almost universal" doesn't that make a good case for its removal?
I use KDE and mostly like it. But, I think the devs make decisions that contradict the wishes of their users and they don't listen when those users speak up. They just say something along the lines of "if you started using it you would like it" even if their users HAVE used it and still can't stand the feature.
I exchanged a couple of posts with Aaron Seigo on his blog and that was pretty much the attitude he expressed.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 1
A revenue-neutral flat sales tax would be ruinous for the poor and middle class. The very wealthy would see their effective tax rate drop precipitously because they spend such a small percentage of their income/wealth.
Re:Such systems have been proposed before
on
The Zuckerberg Tax
·
· Score: 1
In the U.S. capital gains of "long term" investments are taxed at a MUCH MUCH lower rate than income.
The fact that Apple makes that much more money simply means that they are overcharging their customers. Yet, Apple fans often crow about this as if it's something for them to be pleased about. I have never understood that.
(Full disclosure: I have a Galaxy Nexus Android phone. Since I use Linux at home and work, the iPhone was always a non-starter for me.)
Re:Part of a money conflict within the King family
on
A Copyright Nightmare
·
· Score: 1
Outstanding. Among the best posts I've seen on slashdot.
Civil unions. The government should not recognize "marriage" as a prerequisite for any legal benefits. Instead, government should only recognize civil unions. After a couple joins in a civil union, they can have any kind of marriage ceremony that they want but it will have no legal force.
This splits religion from the legitimate interest of a couple having legal rights to make decisions involving their partners.
I think the real problems is that users ignore the security permissions that apps request. Nobody seems to read any warnings that come with technology. I can't tell you the number of times I've watched users on Windows systems blindly clicking "ok" to any dialog box that pops up without bothering to read it.
If a person independently comes up with a way to do something that is already patented, doesn't that mean that it's "non-obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art".
That is what vadim_t seems to be saying-- that there is an obvious solution to a problem that is denied him because someone (presumably with deep pockets) patented it.
That is patently untrue. I don't believe in invisible intangible pink unicorns either, but that doesn't imply that I have "faith" that they don't exist. It simply means that I have encountered no factual evidence for their existence.
There are an infinite number of things that a person can imagine for which there is no evidence of their existence, yet I've never had anyone claim that I had "faith" in their nonexistence. It's odd that so many claim that I MUST have faith if I fail to believe in their pet deity.
It would be if you had used it. Faith is by definition a belief in something without proof. Not believing in anything requires absolutely no faith whatsoever.
As a former smoker, I can chime in here. I smoked for ~12 years and quit smoking ~12 years ago. Nicotine is (to my understanding) the only substance with the capacity to selectively flip a person's state. By this I mean that if a smoker is edgy or tense, smoking has a calming effect. If the smoker is tired or sleepy, smoking increases alertness. This is an important part of its addictiveness-- the power to regulate one's physical being. You can choose to be soothed or made alert.
On a more personal level, I do miss smoking on occasion but it's a mere faint echo of the powerful craving that you feel when you NEED a smoke. Smoking is most enjoyable after meals and when drinking alcohol. I used to use my smoke breaks to think and solved any number of work related problems while wandering around outside. Now, I just get up and walk around when I need a break from the office.
But, you can go to heaven, even after doing all that. Assuming your child killer is a true believer, he/she will ask for forgiveness, follow the bible recipe for salvation, and then go to heaven too. Win-Win!
Slashdot Mirror
That's as much /. as I can take for today.
Coming from the comment whose first line is:
Oh please, bitch.
I heartily encourage you to spend more time away from slashdot.
And during that time Intel made sure that it was difficult to buy AMD powered machines from any of their long time partners. (I'm looking at you, Dell.)
"The article itself" is presenting the results of a scientific study. If you have problems with the methodology, then by all means present them! But to disregard the article because your feelings are hurt is disingenuous. Perhaps your family IS different, but as the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not data.
Excellent analysis. I learned something today :-)
I don't see how this letter could do any damage whatsoever. It was informative and polite while simultaneously firm in stating the committment that most of the people that WORK on the internet feel.
Except corporations often dodge their tax obligations and so don't fund these "handouts" as you so quaintly call them.
So, the law requires the patient to submit to an invasive, medically unnecessary procedure in order to wave a picture of a fetus in the patient's face? And Republicans talk about their opponents as being in favor of "big government".
Atheism is the lack of a "theism"-- a belief in God. Would also say that people who lack belief in pink unicorns "operate on same level as believing in God"? Would you accuse these apinkunicornists of being part of a religion?
There is a universe of things that can be imagined but cannot be proven or disproven by the standards you put forth. It would be ridiculous to say that you're not being scientific if you fail to believe in every thing for which there is no proof.
Also, you're using the word agnostic incorrectly. You can be an agnostic atheist and indeed, that is what most atheists would affirm their beliefs as.
I have attempted to use activities and also find them completely useless. Ditto with nepomuk. I've TRIED to like them and just find them to be a waste of resources. And, if the hatred for the cashew is "almost universal" doesn't that make a good case for its removal?
I use KDE and mostly like it. But, I think the devs make decisions that contradict the wishes of their users and they don't listen when those users speak up. They just say something along the lines of "if you started using it you would like it" even if their users HAVE used it and still can't stand the feature.
I exchanged a couple of posts with Aaron Seigo on his blog and that was pretty much the attitude he expressed.
One name: Miguel de Icaza
A revenue-neutral flat sales tax would be ruinous for the poor and middle class. The very wealthy would see their effective tax rate drop precipitously because they spend such a small percentage of their income/wealth.
In the U.S. capital gains of "long term" investments are taxed at a MUCH MUCH lower rate than income.
Homocide? Is that the killing of gay people?
Webkit? Oh, you mean the KHTML code base they took over and polished (in conjunction with other companies such as Google.)
The fact that Apple makes that much more money simply means that they are overcharging their customers. Yet, Apple fans often crow about this as if it's something for them to be pleased about. I have never understood that.
(Full disclosure: I have a Galaxy Nexus Android phone. Since I use Linux at home and work, the iPhone was always a non-starter for me.)
Outstanding. Among the best posts I've seen on slashdot.
DAMN YOU SIR! I now have the "Meow Mix" jingle stuck in my head.
Civil unions. The government should not recognize "marriage" as a prerequisite for any legal benefits. Instead, government should only recognize civil unions. After a couple joins in a civil union, they can have any kind of marriage ceremony that they want but it will have no legal force.
This splits religion from the legitimate interest of a couple having legal rights to make decisions involving their partners.
(In short, I agree.)
I think the real problems is that users ignore the security permissions that apps request. Nobody seems to read any warnings that come with technology. I can't tell you the number of times I've watched users on Windows systems blindly clicking "ok" to any dialog box that pops up without bothering to read it.
If a person independently comes up with a way to do something that is already patented, doesn't that mean that it's "non-obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art".
That is what vadim_t seems to be saying-- that there is an obvious solution to a problem that is denied him because someone (presumably with deep pockets) patented it.
That is patently untrue. I don't believe in invisible intangible pink unicorns either, but that doesn't imply that I have "faith" that they don't exist. It simply means that I have encountered no factual evidence for their existence.
There are an infinite number of things that a person can imagine for which there is no evidence of their existence, yet I've never had anyone claim that I had "faith" in their nonexistence. It's odd that so many claim that I MUST have faith if I fail to believe in their pet deity.
It would be if you had used it. Faith is by definition a belief in something without proof. Not believing in anything requires absolutely no faith whatsoever.
As a former smoker, I can chime in here. I smoked for ~12 years and quit smoking ~12 years ago. Nicotine is (to my understanding) the only substance with the capacity to selectively flip a person's state. By this I mean that if a smoker is edgy or tense, smoking has a calming effect. If the smoker is tired or sleepy, smoking increases alertness. This is an important part of its addictiveness-- the power to regulate one's physical being. You can choose to be soothed or made alert.
On a more personal level, I do miss smoking on occasion but it's a mere faint echo of the powerful craving that you feel when you NEED a smoke. Smoking is most enjoyable after meals and when drinking alcohol. I used to use my smoke breaks to think and solved any number of work related problems while wandering around outside. Now, I just get up and walk around when I need a break from the office.
Sounds like the "no true scotsman" argument to me.
But, you can go to heaven, even after doing all that. Assuming your child killer is a true believer, he/she will ask for forgiveness, follow the bible recipe for salvation, and then go to heaven too. Win-Win!