PS does anyone know when that "Earth is 6,000 years old" started? I'd like to know how many years I have to add to come up with a more accurate number.
The name you're looking for is James Ussher, a Calvinist archbishop.
The specific works where he specified that the date of Creation was the nightfall before 23 OCT 4004 BC (Julian calendar, mind you) were published between 1650 and 1654 (I don't know which of them first used the 4004bc creation time).
Why so many flavours of Christian seem to be addicted to the writings of a Calvinist archbishop, I've never understood. Most American Christians are, at best, uninspired by Calvinism....
after killing off regulations, the large corporations would have an even larger stranglehold on the marketplace, as there would be no anti-trust laws to keep them from colluding, price-fixing, etc.
Corporations are creations of the government, giving limited legal liabilities to large companies.
The so-called "libertarian paradise" would NOT include corporations, and so no limited legal liability for the officers/owners of those large companies.
Which would mean that most of them would dissolve and the rest would be moderately paralyzed by fear of lawsuits.
Note that a lawsuit against Ballmer would be a lot more likely to induce reasonable behaviour than a lawsuit against Microsoft - it's a lot more...personal...when it's YOUR money and potential jailtime, as opposed to a legal fiction's money....
But only 4 times as likely to be murdered, period.
Obviously, a lot of Brits have figured out that firearms aren't the only way to murder someone.
Note, by the by, that there are four-six (depending on how you count "close") States with murder rates "close" to that of the UK. Only one of them is on the "more gun control" side of the debate, and one of them has NO gun control laws of any sort (though Federal Laws still apply).
Note also that murder rates in the USA have been declining for decades, in spite of the number of firearms increasing for decades....
By slashing Military spending to just double the closest US rival - from 500%?
And how would that "save the country"?
If the US Military budget were reduced that amount, we'd still be running deficits in the $500B range (which, admittedly, is lower than Obama has managed, but generally higher than Bush Jr managed - it's still too damn high).
I am 100% against them owning a an AR15 which can fire 30 substantially more lethal rounds in a very short time.
Why do so many people have this insane belief that a.223 is an incredibly lethal/powerful round???
Hint: it's not. It's a glorified varmint round (note that the.223 is not especially powerful even compared to other varmint rounds like the.222), which means it's intended for shooting things like rabbits, not people. The.223 was NOT adopted by the Army because it was powerful - it was adopted because it was lightweight and you could carry a bunch more little rounds than you could the big rounds (.308) it replaced.
It's not even close to as powerful as a.270, a.308, a.30-06, much less a 12 Gauge shotgun shell.
Note that at the distances involved in a shooting in a house, pretty much every ball in a shotgun shell is going to hit the target, and any one of those balls (if you're loaded with, say, #1 Buck or larger) is more lethal than a.223, much less all 12 or so (depending on the shot size).
If robbers know people have guns, they will bring guns. They'll have less compunction about shooting you.
Did you know that "Home invasion" is a much rarer crime in the USA than the UK? Criminals in the USA seem to prefer breaking into empty houses rather than houses that include people (who might have guns).
We have the most powerful and most advanced military in the world (for the moment), and we cant defeat people staging their resistance from caves.
Vietnam wasnt that different.
Yes, we can defeat them. If we're willing to pay the political price.
Alas, we're not willing to pay that price, mostly because the price of defeating them isn't worth the bother.
Note, though, that Vietnam was a bit different. We were fighting (and defeating) an insurgency. BUT, we gave the insurgency a refuge by refusing to actually invade North Vietnam (where the guns, ammo, bombs were all coming from) or the USSR (where the guns, ammo, bombs were all made). And an insurgency operating out of a safe haven is IMPOSSIBLE to defeat permanently.
Until you decide you're tired of this "safe haven" crap and eliminate it.
He only appears a liberal when compared against your own right-wing.
Not even there. What he appears to be is a classic Democrat - if the Republicans want it, he's opposed, if the Dems want it, he's in favour.
Though he does seem to have made an exception to that rule for assassinations - he's the only Pres so far who has claimed that he has the legal right to assassinate American citizens, and then gone ahead and done it (semi-publicly - I'm still not sure whether that was supposed to have gotten out).
Though he does seem to have done the right thing with the Boston Bombers - treating them like common criminals rather than dignify them as "enemy combatants"....
The other question is do these works qualify for DMCA protection if they are distributed in an encrypted format?
Since this only applies to "sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972", unless that same recording (the one made before 15FEB1972) was encrypted, it's a NEW recording and the DMCA applies normally.
If your apple tree made 2 apples last year, and you gave 50% of them to your neighbor, and this year, your tree makes 100 apples, and you give 2% of your apples to your neighbor, are you more or less generous than the year before?
Bad Analogy...
Better one might be:
If you charged your neighbor $100 a year to mow his grass last year, and this year you want him to pay $150 dollars, have you increased or decreased his year-to-year cost if you change your mind and only charge him $120?
I do think hands-free cell phone use is distracting in a way that a person sitting next to you isn't. I'm wondering if the connection is out, wondering if they can hear me, fiddling with the phone, making sure the phone isn't falling on the floor, trying to understand what they're saying.
You really worry a lot about your cell conversations, don't you?
For me, the main difference between talking on my cell (bluetooth headset, mind you) and to my wife sitting beside me is that I am much more likely to turn to face my wife when I'm talking to her - on the cell I just watch the road....
Slashdot Mirror
The name you're looking for is James Ussher, a Calvinist archbishop.
The specific works where he specified that the date of Creation was the nightfall before 23 OCT 4004 BC (Julian calendar, mind you) were published between 1650 and 1654 (I don't know which of them first used the 4004bc creation time).
Why so many flavours of Christian seem to be addicted to the writings of a Calvinist archbishop, I've never understood. Most American Christians are, at best, uninspired by Calvinism....
Bad joke! Bad! To bed without supper for you, Sam :-)
Someone has already pointed out that the patents in question were issued from 1994-1999.
So, they weren't published, and they seem to meet the other requirements for "submarine patents".
Michael Longcor made a song out of this one early this century - quite good, if you Kipple...
Corporations are creations of the government, giving limited legal liabilities to large companies.
The so-called "libertarian paradise" would NOT include corporations, and so no limited legal liability for the officers/owners of those large companies.
Which would mean that most of them would dissolve and the rest would be moderately paralyzed by fear of lawsuits.
Note that a lawsuit against Ballmer would be a lot more likely to induce reasonable behaviour than a lawsuit against Microsoft - it's a lot more...personal...when it's YOUR money and potential jailtime, as opposed to a legal fiction's money....
But only 4 times as likely to be murdered, period.
Obviously, a lot of Brits have figured out that firearms aren't the only way to murder someone.
Note, by the by, that there are four-six (depending on how you count "close") States with murder rates "close" to that of the UK. Only one of them is on the "more gun control" side of the debate, and one of them has NO gun control laws of any sort (though Federal Laws still apply).
Note also that murder rates in the USA have been declining for decades, in spite of the number of firearms increasing for decades....
Ask that of the survivors of Auschwitz, Dachau, Treblinka, among others.
We might also mention the American Civil War and the American Revolution.
Taking down Napoleon might count too.
And how would that "save the country"?
If the US Military budget were reduced that amount, we'd still be running deficits in the $500B range (which, admittedly, is lower than Obama has managed, but generally higher than Bush Jr managed - it's still too damn high).
Note the "several sources" and "a report funded by the oil and gas industry".
So, no, it's not just an industry report behind this. It might be *gasp* actual science.
"More knowledgeable" is not necessarily the same as "smarter".
Or a parabolic mirror to concentrate sunlight until the focus is hot enough.
Maple syrup...mmmmmmmm.
In case you weren't aware, there are a LOT of NRA members in the American military.
Why do so many people have this insane belief that a .223 is an incredibly lethal/powerful round???
Hint: it's not. It's a glorified varmint round (note that the .223 is not especially powerful even compared to other varmint rounds like the .222), which means it's intended for shooting things like rabbits, not people. The .223 was NOT adopted by the Army because it was powerful - it was adopted because it was lightweight and you could carry a bunch more little rounds than you could the big rounds (.308) it replaced.
It's not even close to as powerful as a .270, a .308, a.30-06, much less a 12 Gauge shotgun shell.
Note that at the distances involved in a shooting in a house, pretty much every ball in a shotgun shell is going to hit the target, and any one of those balls (if you're loaded with, say, #1 Buck or larger) is more lethal than a .223, much less all 12 or so (depending on the shot size).
Did you know that "Home invasion" is a much rarer crime in the USA than the UK? Criminals in the USA seem to prefer breaking into empty houses rather than houses that include people (who might have guns).
Yes, we can defeat them. If we're willing to pay the political price.
Alas, we're not willing to pay that price, mostly because the price of defeating them isn't worth the bother.
Note, though, that Vietnam was a bit different. We were fighting (and defeating) an insurgency. BUT, we gave the insurgency a refuge by refusing to actually invade North Vietnam (where the guns, ammo, bombs were all coming from) or the USSR (where the guns, ammo, bombs were all made). And an insurgency operating out of a safe haven is IMPOSSIBLE to defeat permanently.
Until you decide you're tired of this "safe haven" crap and eliminate it.
Not even there. What he appears to be is a classic Democrat - if the Republicans want it, he's opposed, if the Dems want it, he's in favour.
Though he does seem to have made an exception to that rule for assassinations - he's the only Pres so far who has claimed that he has the legal right to assassinate American citizens, and then gone ahead and done it (semi-publicly - I'm still not sure whether that was supposed to have gotten out).
Though he does seem to have done the right thing with the Boston Bombers - treating them like common criminals rather than dignify them as "enemy combatants"....
Yeah, we really kicked our own asses trying to occupy Germany and Japan after that last little disagreement we had with them.
They had us leaving with our tails between our legs after only a couple GENERATIONS...
Which is why we don't need anymore gun control.
Oh, wait, this isn't about gun control, is it? What I meant to say was "Someone was SHOT??? OMG, MORE GUN CONTROL!!!"
Hmm, let's see. Population density worldwide is ~52/km^2.
Population density in France is ~117/km^2.
Assuming France's population density worldwide, the world would have 15 Billion people.
I don't consider France's ecosystem to be falling apart, but it has been 30+ years since I was there - maybe a lot has happened since then.
And last I read, current trends indicate that population will peak below 15 Billion, then start declining before the end of the century.
Nah, that would be Ezekiel, if you're talking about Ezekiel 23:20
Though God could arguably be considered the ghost writer....
Since this only applies to "sound recordings fixed before February 15, 1972", unless that same recording (the one made before 15FEB1972) was encrypted, it's a NEW recording and the DMCA applies normally.
Bad Analogy...
Better one might be:
If you charged your neighbor $100 a year to mow his grass last year, and this year you want him to pay $150 dollars, have you increased or decreased his year-to-year cost if you change your mind and only charge him $120?
Hint: $120 is more than $100.
Which would make GP's 1% more like 0.7%...
Your point was?
You really worry a lot about your cell conversations, don't you?
For me, the main difference between talking on my cell (bluetooth headset, mind you) and to my wife sitting beside me is that I am much more likely to turn to face my wife when I'm talking to her - on the cell I just watch the road....