The shutdown was because of the Republicans. If they could pass a budget, they could avoid these filibusters.
Schumer now has a credible threat to shut down the government over DACA, which gives him some leverage in getting a DACA law through. I'm pending judgment to see how this plays out. If he comes through and gets DACA passed before Trump's deadline, I'm going to call it a win.
If the Republicans could find enough unity in the party to get a budget through, which you'd consider one of the basic functions of Congress, the Senate Democrats couldn't filibuster spending. Since Republicans are bloody incompetent, they give the Democrats a chance to filibuster the continuing resolutions the government needs.
And, no, we're not a majority-rule democracy. We're a minority-rule democracy, and I don't see why that's an improvement.
This is the equivalent of saying, in 1957, that air travel would be for everyday people in 1965, only more so. Disregarding the differences between air travel and space travel, 2025 is ludicrously soon.
The taxpayers of New Zealand elected the government that violated its own laws. How is this different from Bush getting us into an unnecessary war that cost trillions, destabilized the Middle East, and helped form ISIS? I didn't vote for the guy, but I still get to pay for what he did.
The point is that the US shut down Megaupload, with at best unclear legal justification, destroying DotCom's business. The business assets were in the US. The New Zealand government was (as far as I know) not a party to that. While the New Zealand government obviously mistreated him, it didn't destroy his business, which is largely what he's complaining about.
Having copyrighted materials on your server is not necessarily illegal. Accessing them by one link may be legal and accessing them by another might be illegal. It can be very difficult to tell if one of the uploads was legal. It's hard to impossible to write satisfactory laws here.
Linux is very often not a solution. There are a lot of Windows programs that can't run natively on Linux, and which may not run well under Wine, and which don't have good Linux equivalents. If you don't use any of those, great, but many people do.
Thank you for demonstrating that anti-liberals call anyone who disagrees with them names, disparages their character and intelligence, and hold onto their ideas in the face of evidence to the contrary*. You missed calling liberals inhuman, but others have done that for you. Your claims don't match any liberals I personally know, so you may be projecting.
*Have you any frippin' idea how bad bigotry has been historically? Liberals don't have righties singing spirituals in the fields while picking cotton, for example.
IBM put out a computer built primarily with off-the-shelf components, an unpolished 16K BIOS, and an OS they didn't have exclusive rights to. In other words, there wasn't anything other companies couldn't replicate, once compatible BIOSes were available. With a little more attention to making something IBM-specific, they could have made it difficult or impossible for the PC clones to arise, keeping IBM in the PC business and holding back the computer revolution.
Jobs had a style, a knack for knowing what people would want (which wasn't perfect, but much better than people in comparable positions), and a sense of what was possible at the time (again, not perfect, but good).
It had decent email and browsing capability, as well as a UI designed around its intended use. Other phones had features the iPhone lacked, but not its ease of use.
Apple will take any customer they can get. What they've been trying to do for a long time is hide all the messy details so the user doesn't have to deal with them. This means that people with more money than sense will lean towards their products.
Making the phone 1mm thicker would be a significant increase, and would probably reduce sales. Apple makes their money primarily by selling stuff.
There's people on Slashdot whose desires in a phone or laptop are actually unusual, and they don't seem to realize it. I'm not even sure many of them have the Apple products they love to complain about.
People apparently like to buy thinner phones, for whatever reason. I certainly wouldn't want one much thicker than the 7mm I've already got, and thinner would fit into my pocket better. Apple likes to build things people buy.
Guess what. An insignificant segment of their market cares strongly about easily user-replaceable batteries. Approximately nobody complaining about iPhones is saying, "Gee, if we could only replace our own batteries."
There are advantages to having built-in batteries. It's possible to make the phone thinner (which is a marketing plus) without sacrificing as much battery.
A mission statement can be a good thing for company goals to crystallize around. It can also be a pile of meaningless felderkarb. It can be hard to tell which if you're outside the company.
The Fourth protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures. It's up to the courts to decide what's reasonable. It's generally agreed that a lawful warrant makes searches and seizures it covers reasonable. There's other cases, and it's currently held to be reasonable to check that airline passengers have neither weapons nor bombs.
So, if the NSA collects information automatically, and nobody sees the information without a warrant, is that really a violation of the Fourth?
Neither the NSA nor TSA activities are clearly unconstitutional.
Please find me a case of someone who did what Clinton did and was prosecuted for it. I wasn't able to find one. Every case I found where there was criminal prosecution involved the intent to mishandle classified material. I've not seen any evidence, or even any plausibility argument, that suggests Clinton had any sort of intent here. I'd be interested in seeing the case.
If you can't come up with a case, then please stop lying about her treatment.
However, we developed civilization and industry by using massive amounts of nonrenewable resources. Currently, our technology and industrial capabilities are allowing us to move towards renewables to keep civilization going. Given a collapse of technology and industry, the survivors are going to find it much harder to build a new civilization.
If you can get into a position where you can and will walk away from a deal, you won't have to accept a bad deal. I'm actually in that position any time I go into a store. I can walk out without buying anything. I can get attention from service people in certain stores without buying anything. Until there's a deal, I can always walk away to another store.
Funny thing, though. Sales and service people at these stores continue to talk to me, because they figure if I find something I like at an acceptable price with their help I'll probably buy it.
Slashdot Mirror
The shutdown was because of the Republicans. If they could pass a budget, they could avoid these filibusters.
Schumer now has a credible threat to shut down the government over DACA, which gives him some leverage in getting a DACA law through. I'm pending judgment to see how this plays out. If he comes through and gets DACA passed before Trump's deadline, I'm going to call it a win.
If the Republicans could find enough unity in the party to get a budget through, which you'd consider one of the basic functions of Congress, the Senate Democrats couldn't filibuster spending. Since Republicans are bloody incompetent, they give the Democrats a chance to filibuster the continuing resolutions the government needs.
And, no, we're not a majority-rule democracy. We're a minority-rule democracy, and I don't see why that's an improvement.
This is the equivalent of saying, in 1957, that air travel would be for everyday people in 1965, only more so. Disregarding the differences between air travel and space travel, 2025 is ludicrously soon.
The question is not, does this white person have a hard life? The question is, would this white person be worse off if he or she were of another race?
The taxpayers of New Zealand elected the government that violated its own laws. How is this different from Bush getting us into an unnecessary war that cost trillions, destabilized the Middle East, and helped form ISIS? I didn't vote for the guy, but I still get to pay for what he did.
The point is that the US shut down Megaupload, with at best unclear legal justification, destroying DotCom's business. The business assets were in the US. The New Zealand government was (as far as I know) not a party to that. While the New Zealand government obviously mistreated him, it didn't destroy his business, which is largely what he's complaining about.
Having copyrighted materials on your server is not necessarily illegal. Accessing them by one link may be legal and accessing them by another might be illegal. It can be very difficult to tell if one of the uploads was legal. It's hard to impossible to write satisfactory laws here.
Linux is very often not a solution. There are a lot of Windows programs that can't run natively on Linux, and which may not run well under Wine, and which don't have good Linux equivalents. If you don't use any of those, great, but many people do.
Thank you for demonstrating that anti-liberals call anyone who disagrees with them names, disparages their character and intelligence, and hold onto their ideas in the face of evidence to the contrary*. You missed calling liberals inhuman, but others have done that for you. Your claims don't match any liberals I personally know, so you may be projecting.
*Have you any frippin' idea how bad bigotry has been historically? Liberals don't have righties singing spirituals in the fields while picking cotton, for example.
IBM put out a computer built primarily with off-the-shelf components, an unpolished 16K BIOS, and an OS they didn't have exclusive rights to. In other words, there wasn't anything other companies couldn't replicate, once compatible BIOSes were available. With a little more attention to making something IBM-specific, they could have made it difficult or impossible for the PC clones to arise, keeping IBM in the PC business and holding back the computer revolution.
They are frequently the most powerful around when released. Where do you get this information?
Jobs had a style, a knack for knowing what people would want (which wasn't perfect, but much better than people in comparable positions), and a sense of what was possible at the time (again, not perfect, but good).
It had decent email and browsing capability, as well as a UI designed around its intended use. Other phones had features the iPhone lacked, but not its ease of use.
What made the iPod a best-seller was the controls.
Apple will take any customer they can get. What they've been trying to do for a long time is hide all the messy details so the user doesn't have to deal with them. This means that people with more money than sense will lean towards their products.
My eye surgery didn't involve telephones of any sort. I don't see why one would. That stuff's normally taken care of outside the operating area.
You have apparently proceeded from hyperbole to irrelevance.
There's people on Slashdot whose desires in a phone or laptop are actually unusual, and they don't seem to realize it. I'm not even sure many of them have the Apple products they love to complain about.
People apparently like to buy thinner phones, for whatever reason. I certainly wouldn't want one much thicker than the 7mm I've already got, and thinner would fit into my pocket better. Apple likes to build things people buy.
Are there cell phones with non-removable batteries? I haven't heard of them.
There are batteries that take a little extra effort to replace, and if you're replacing one every three years or so that's no big deal.
The external batteries I've seen for iPhones are fairly small, and reasonably convenient. My son's is built into his iPhone case.
Guess what. An insignificant segment of their market cares strongly about easily user-replaceable batteries. Approximately nobody complaining about iPhones is saying, "Gee, if we could only replace our own batteries."
There are advantages to having built-in batteries. It's possible to make the phone thinner (which is a marketing plus) without sacrificing as much battery.
A mission statement can be a good thing for company goals to crystallize around. It can also be a pile of meaningless felderkarb. It can be hard to tell which if you're outside the company.
The Fourth protects against "unreasonable" searches and seizures. It's up to the courts to decide what's reasonable. It's generally agreed that a lawful warrant makes searches and seizures it covers reasonable. There's other cases, and it's currently held to be reasonable to check that airline passengers have neither weapons nor bombs.
So, if the NSA collects information automatically, and nobody sees the information without a warrant, is that really a violation of the Fourth?
Neither the NSA nor TSA activities are clearly unconstitutional.
Please find me a case of someone who did what Clinton did and was prosecuted for it. I wasn't able to find one. Every case I found where there was criminal prosecution involved the intent to mishandle classified material. I've not seen any evidence, or even any plausibility argument, that suggests Clinton had any sort of intent here. I'd be interested in seeing the case.
If you can't come up with a case, then please stop lying about her treatment.
However, we developed civilization and industry by using massive amounts of nonrenewable resources. Currently, our technology and industrial capabilities are allowing us to move towards renewables to keep civilization going. Given a collapse of technology and industry, the survivors are going to find it much harder to build a new civilization.
If you can get into a position where you can and will walk away from a deal, you won't have to accept a bad deal. I'm actually in that position any time I go into a store. I can walk out without buying anything. I can get attention from service people in certain stores without buying anything. Until there's a deal, I can always walk away to another store.
Funny thing, though. Sales and service people at these stores continue to talk to me, because they figure if I find something I like at an acceptable price with their help I'll probably buy it.