The batteries in my stinger missile have gone dead! What will I do?
The poster picked an apt comparison: it's just like when the US trained and gave weapons to the Afghans against the Soviets. How's that one working out for you guys?
Starbucks was the only place around with wifi the second day (they were closed the first). It was cold outside, so only a few people huddled outside checking their e-mail. And everyone inside felt the need to buy coffee if they were going to hang out there. Personally, I got an americano, which is not horribly priced. I did have to suffer through Starbucks coffee though, which is really not very good when it's not combined with large amounts of syrup and milk.
The third day one of the restaurants got their wifi back, but using it (and having heat, also kind of a novelty) required buying an actual meal.
Yes. I was in NY for the hurricane and a public charging station would have been WAY more useful than a phone booth. Also, the cable and cell companies could have gotten a lot of good PR by opening up their wifi hotspots. Starbucks did a lot if business (as in packed wall to wall, sitting on the floor or standing) by having free wifi and power outlets they didn't mind people using.
If apple bought sharp I don't think they'd continue to make all the stuff sharp does. They'd shut down everything except the LCDs they need, and their profits would go *up*.
"Because I don't try to fuck them like a big pile of lead-acid bitches."
I wouldn't think that would do the batteries all that much harm. If you did manage to, say, cause one to leak, I would think it would do you more harm than the battery and you'd probably never try it again.
I'm pretty sure my hang glider won't fit on it, and while I'm in decent shape I don't think I'd want to pedal one of those 600 km in a Candian winter to go see my family at Christmas. So not replacing all car trips, for sure.
It does look like an interesting substitute for a moped or motor bike for the more fitness inclined. I'd be interested in it for commuting if they got the price down in the few thousand range.
Google is usually pretty good about giving you something cool to encourage you to give them your information. This... hey, give us access to your bank accounts and let us track your transactions and you get this cool Google wallet card! How is that different from the credit and debit cards I already have? This one says "Google" on it!
They also just announced another record profit quarter. Apple isn't likely to need to raise capital anytime soon, so the share price doesn't really affect them much.
But his solution is... put the touch screen on a tablet (or smartphone). He specifically points out that the touch screen has to be low, and for long term use you have to be able to position it wherever you want, with your other hand. You can't do that with a notebook form factor.
No, he's right. People are sometimes roused to fight by apealing to theor their religious beliefs (or rather fears), but the actual religious labels don't matter. Christian, Muslim, Hindi, Buddhist, Sikh, Greek, Roman, Norseman, Druid, Native American, Inca, Aztec, etc. will all fight each other (and themselves) and have, except where time or geography has made it impractical.
Don't worry, I've read it. Note that the first two headline criticisms of first past the post voting (which is a loaded name) are that strategic voting is a bad thing (which is what I'm arguing) and Duverger's "law", which we've already discussed.
The idea that not using first past the post discourages strategic voting is ill considered. Only one person or party can be in charge. Suppose the US suddenly abolished the electoral college (which I agree is kind of silly) in this election. What changes? Virtually nothing, except that now every state is a swing state and none of the strategic voters feel safe voting their conscience. What about voting in rounds? That's better... you might feel secure voting for a third party candidate in the first round, but there's still a huge incentive to vote for the first or second in the second round.
How about if you elect the legislative houses based on direct proportion of the vote (or one of the various multiple tallying systems? If the most important thing to you is that the other guys don't get majority control you're still best off voting for (or giving all your votes to) the second (or first) place party, not a third party. Third parties "steal" votes, no matter what system you're using.
The real problem is party discipline. Do things to severely weaken it. The greatest advantage of representative legislatures is that you're electing someone to represent you. A person. Someone from your community, who you can actually know, if you want to. Someone who lives in (if your laws are written correctly) and is directly responsible to your community. Voters should vote for whichever person they feel would best represent them, and the elected representative should be free to vote to best represent his constituents, regardless of party affiliation. Some campaign finance law reform would probably be an excellent place to start, and weakening executive power a good followup. You could even do something as simple as make it illegal to mention party affiliation in ads.
You might be right. There are only polls, elections, and counterexamples from all other first world nations that use similar voting systems as evidence against you.
Yank off the bracelet as soon as you grab the kid and toss it. The parents already KNOW where the kid was "just a few seconds ago."
It's simply not good protection against stranger kidnapping, and even worse against the MUCH more common family kidnapping. It's a bit of psychological security for paranoid parents and possibly a useful gizmo for inattentive ones. Believing it's for protecting your child against being kidnapping is just fooling yourself.
The chips in dogs only have ID numbers. They don't track. People do the same thing for their kids all the time by teaching them what their names, phone numbers and addresses are.
Given the recent events where kids have been abducted and killed - the moment that somebody realized there was a problem, their location could be ascertained. Hypothetically, if the girls had these devices, they might still be alive today.
Right. Because in the extremely rare instances where someone kidnaps a kid to kill them, the kidnappers are all so stupid they won't check for these things and toss them as soon as they become at all common.
And repeat exposure to that trauma helps calibrate your risk assessment abilities. There's a pretty good argument that a lot of modern childhood problems are due to parents who let their irrational fears get the better of them.
Opinion polling puts the third party candidates at around 1-3% each, which puts zero well within the margin of error. Gallup in September put each of the third party candidates tied at 1%, +- 2%, in a poll of registered voters.
That's another use of commodore, yes. And you don't have to be senior... any naval captain on a naval ship with a captain in command will be called commodore. If you're an army or marine captain you get the temporary title of "major."
Perhaps you should ask your mom or dad. And long time ago is within my lifetime. The fact that you are young enough to not see that is somewhat of a testament to how well it worked.
They remember when EVERYONE was spending at US levels during the fifties and sixties. I remember when everyone (except the US, but including all their "foes") were ramping things down in the 80s and early 90s at the end of the cold war.
I'm basing it on before the war compared to now. Core military funding has been siphoned off to fund the wars. Now before you claim but spending is more, look at what was actually said- Core funding.
Oh, I get it. Now that someone has looked up the numbers and they don't support you, you're talking about "core" funding, because actually fighting wars shouldn't factor into calculating military spending. I don't think there's any point in discussing any further.
"Duverger himself did not regard his principle as absolute."
"The converse of Duverger's Law is not always valid"
"In recent years some researchers have modified Duverger's Law by suggesting that electoral systems are an effect of party systems rather than a cause."
"It has been shown that changes from a plurality system to a proportional system are typically preceded by the emergence of more than two effective parties, and are typically not followed by a substantial increase in the effective number of parties."
The mechanics of elections probably do affect the style of politics that emerges, but not to the degree you seem to think. Third parties don't go from 1% to 30% because you change the style of voting. It's also interesting to note that of the two countries most like the US that use direct representation, the UK and Canada, both are "exceptions" with multiple parties. Looking at some others, picking at random... Barbados currently has two major parties, but has had competitive third parties when needed, Jamaica is dominated by two parties and Morocco currently has a bunch of competitive parties. It looks like Duverger's "law" is more of a theoretical tendency with a bunch of caveats.
Slashdot Mirror
The batteries in my stinger missile have gone dead! What will I do?
The poster picked an apt comparison: it's just like when the US trained and gave weapons to the Afghans against the Soviets. How's that one working out for you guys?
Starbucks was the only place around with wifi the second day (they were closed the first). It was cold outside, so only a few people huddled outside checking their e-mail. And everyone inside felt the need to buy coffee if they were going to hang out there. Personally, I got an americano, which is not horribly priced. I did have to suffer through Starbucks coffee though, which is really not very good when it's not combined with large amounts of syrup and milk.
The third day one of the restaurants got their wifi back, but using it (and having heat, also kind of a novelty) required buying an actual meal.
Yes. I was in NY for the hurricane and a public charging station would have been WAY more useful than a phone booth. Also, the cable and cell companies could have gotten a lot of good PR by opening up their wifi hotspots. Starbucks did a lot if business (as in packed wall to wall, sitting on the floor or standing) by having free wifi and power outlets they didn't mind people using.
It's easier to fix a cell tower than a zillion phone lines.
If apple bought sharp I don't think they'd continue to make all the stuff sharp does. They'd shut down everything except the LCDs they need, and their profits would go *up*.
"Because I don't try to fuck them like a big pile of lead-acid bitches."
I wouldn't think that would do the batteries all that much harm. If you did manage to, say, cause one to leak, I would think it would do you more harm than the battery and you'd probably never try it again.
And your employer doesn't pay any taxes, he just takes them out of your salary.
I'm pretty sure my hang glider won't fit on it, and while I'm in decent shape I don't think I'd want to pedal one of those 600 km in a Candian winter to go see my family at Christmas. So not replacing all car trips, for sure.
It does look like an interesting substitute for a moped or motor bike for the more fitness inclined. I'd be interested in it for commuting if they got the price down in the few thousand range.
Google has invented the credit card!
Google is usually pretty good about giving you something cool to encourage you to give them your information. This... hey, give us access to your bank accounts and let us track your transactions and you get this cool Google wallet card! How is that different from the credit and debit cards I already have? This one says "Google" on it!
A masters degree is almost required to get a permanent job teaching in Canada now. How many MBAs do you know that make only 80k?
They also just announced another record profit quarter. Apple isn't likely to need to raise capital anytime soon, so the share price doesn't really affect them much.
But his solution is... put the touch screen on a tablet (or smartphone). He specifically points out that the touch screen has to be low, and for long term use you have to be able to position it wherever you want, with your other hand. You can't do that with a notebook form factor.
Homosexuals don't generally have a driving urge to make everyone else into homosexuals, or to run governments under homosexual principles.
No, he's right. People are sometimes roused to fight by apealing to theor their religious beliefs (or rather fears), but the actual religious labels don't matter. Christian, Muslim, Hindi, Buddhist, Sikh, Greek, Roman, Norseman, Druid, Native American, Inca, Aztec, etc. will all fight each other (and themselves) and have, except where time or geography has made it impractical.
Don't worry, I've read it. Note that the first two headline criticisms of first past the post voting (which is a loaded name) are that strategic voting is a bad thing (which is what I'm arguing) and Duverger's "law", which we've already discussed.
The idea that not using first past the post discourages strategic voting is ill considered. Only one person or party can be in charge. Suppose the US suddenly abolished the electoral college (which I agree is kind of silly) in this election. What changes? Virtually nothing, except that now every state is a swing state and none of the strategic voters feel safe voting their conscience. What about voting in rounds? That's better... you might feel secure voting for a third party candidate in the first round, but there's still a huge incentive to vote for the first or second in the second round.
How about if you elect the legislative houses based on direct proportion of the vote (or one of the various multiple tallying systems? If the most important thing to you is that the other guys don't get majority control you're still best off voting for (or giving all your votes to) the second (or first) place party, not a third party. Third parties "steal" votes, no matter what system you're using.
The real problem is party discipline. Do things to severely weaken it. The greatest advantage of representative legislatures is that you're electing someone to represent you. A person. Someone from your community, who you can actually know, if you want to. Someone who lives in (if your laws are written correctly) and is directly responsible to your community. Voters should vote for whichever person they feel would best represent them, and the elected representative should be free to vote to best represent his constituents, regardless of party affiliation. Some campaign finance law reform would probably be an excellent place to start, and weakening executive power a good followup. You could even do something as simple as make it illegal to mention party affiliation in ads.
You might be right. There are only polls, elections, and counterexamples from all other first world nations that use similar voting systems as evidence against you.
Yank off the bracelet as soon as you grab the kid and toss it. The parents already KNOW where the kid was "just a few seconds ago."
It's simply not good protection against stranger kidnapping, and even worse against the MUCH more common family kidnapping. It's a bit of psychological security for paranoid parents and possibly a useful gizmo for inattentive ones. Believing it's for protecting your child against being kidnapping is just fooling yourself.
The chips in dogs only have ID numbers. They don't track. People do the same thing for their kids all the time by teaching them what their names, phone numbers and addresses are.
Right. Because in the extremely rare instances where someone kidnaps a kid to kill them, the kidnappers are all so stupid they won't check for these things and toss them as soon as they become at all common.
And repeat exposure to that trauma helps calibrate your risk assessment abilities. There's a pretty good argument that a lot of modern childhood problems are due to parents who let their irrational fears get the better of them.
Razor blades aren't particularly expensive.
Opinion polling puts the third party candidates at around 1-3% each, which puts zero well within the margin of error. Gallup in September put each of the third party candidates tied at 1%, +- 2%, in a poll of registered voters.
That's another use of commodore, yes. And you don't have to be senior... any naval captain on a naval ship with a captain in command will be called commodore. If you're an army or marine captain you get the temporary title of "major."
They remember when EVERYONE was spending at US levels during the fifties and sixties. I remember when everyone (except the US, but including all their "foes") were ramping things down in the 80s and early 90s at the end of the cold war.
Oh, I get it. Now that someone has looked up the numbers and they don't support you, you're talking about "core" funding, because actually fighting wars shouldn't factor into calculating military spending. I don't think there's any point in discussing any further.
You should read your links:
"Duverger himself did not regard his principle as absolute."
"The converse of Duverger's Law is not always valid"
"In recent years some researchers have modified Duverger's Law by suggesting that electoral systems are an effect of party systems rather than a cause."
"It has been shown that changes from a plurality system to a proportional system are typically preceded by the emergence of more than two effective parties, and are typically not followed by a substantial increase in the effective number of parties."
The mechanics of elections probably do affect the style of politics that emerges, but not to the degree you seem to think. Third parties don't go from 1% to 30% because you change the style of voting. It's also interesting to note that of the two countries most like the US that use direct representation, the UK and Canada, both are "exceptions" with multiple parties. Looking at some others, picking at random... Barbados currently has two major parties, but has had competitive third parties when needed, Jamaica is dominated by two parties and Morocco currently has a bunch of competitive parties. It looks like Duverger's "law" is more of a theoretical tendency with a bunch of caveats.