Thanks for the jab at my ability to think, based on whether I've had sex without birth control.
And please make sure you get your SUV in the shot when you take that picture.
This comment and others like it are missing my point. I'm sure we can dig up hundreds of examples of people doing active things that justify the uber power that only the Escalade can provide, but I was commenting on the thousands of others driving around in the city or suburb, many times for a lone commute. I don't think there was anything wrong with a station wagon - it was built for a proper purpose, and does that job well. The SUV solves a problem that doesn't exist. We had/actual/ utility vehicles long ago. But most SUVs I see are being used as station wagons.
I'm able to get just as remote as I'd like with a car. I just make sure there's a good pair of boots or a canoe to take me the rest of the way. You sound like you're active and trying to teach your kids to be the same, so it's not as applicable to you, but some people's "outdoor experience" is getting less and less remote because they drive right up to the freakin' thing. A walk in the woods does wonders, and keeps it there for our kids and grandkids to enjoy.
I'd like for you to be right, but the reality of it is that people will always pay for what they think is important. In this case, the idea of an SUV is very important to a lot of people.
The importance is, for most owners, a necessary expense. The SUV is essentially a face-saving minivan. Guys and girls who wake up one day realizing that they have 2.5 children and a hockey game or ballerina class to chauffeur around on saturday mornings need to feel like they haven't yet abandoned their youthful carefree lifestyle.
The SUV is a way to convince themselves that they are something they're not.
For the record, I don't think there's anything wrong with ending up with the kids and white picket fence. I think it's a problem when you try and ignore or cover it with your choice of vehicle.
It's both - for example, not willing to be a slave is a very specific problem to an individual, as well as a greater problem. Although you can get into differing grades of importance (unwilling to have kids educated with others that don't share religion, or unwilling to eat at McDonald's when all of your friends go out), there's always the subjective and personal implications that people call up when they use the phrase "I'm unwilling to..."
It's just being contrary to say that someone's opinion of unsuitability is shared by nobody.
Besides, there's no indication that the original poster said he/she was speaking for anybody else.
wow... I was all set to say "YHBT HAND" yadda yadda, but it looks like he was serious. hell, he was serious enough to defend it by adding letters and spaces to get things to fit, even.
He seems to really like that rape analogy. From his letter (addressing Tunis):
"I have said it before, and I will say it again to you, and of course you will not listen, but the record must be made clear: You can't charge a lawyer and you can't charge a rapist with anything unless you tell him in the charging document with specificity--with facts alleged--what he has done."
Am I crazy, or does that look like he's comparing himself to the rapist? Not exactly a favorable light, and definitely not the words of a stable man.
Actually, I think it's his whole point - these are the articles and stats that closely followed the tightening of restrictions on legal gun ownership - essentially not solving the problem, and only restricting the rights of the people that weren't the source of problems in the first place.
I got the message clearly - don't punish based on the object, punish based on the behaviour, be it guns, knives, cars, or lasers.
Am I the only one that's really pissed off that Microsoft actually requires you installing Silverlight just to view a bunch of jpegs? how hard can it be to screw up a simple previous comic button that they need this???
From a moral standpoint, I agree that you should act in good faith. However, what's happening is akin to that clerk finding out his mistake a day later, and then going into your house to steal the balance.
They may have legal claim to the money, but not to an unauthorized charge on your credit card. If they're legally in the clear, the courts should be where they pursue it.
You can't do whatever you want just because someone owes you money. In this case, Amazon is interpreting the law themselves, and just taking the cash back. The transaction has gone beyond what checks they had in place, and is past where they can legally stop the transaction (indeed, they actually completed it themselves).
I think the main thing that bugs me is the/way/ they're trying to even the score, not whether they have a right to the returns.
You may very well owe me $500, but I can't go and smash $500-worth of your windows, or steal your paycheck.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. I know people will say it has nothing to do with his points, but written communication follows a syntax - the more we deviate from that structure, the more chance we have of missing the point, and perpetuating bad usage.
Oh, and "their" was actually used correctly at one point - why did it stop? I can take the occasional typo (even a "word" typo), but there are just too many these days.
I find myself cringing a little bit more, each time.
To the poster, good points, but please take a bit more time and make it an even better post.
I'm even surprised you've got the balls to post this on Slashdot, since most of us that make a $4000 purchase actually take at least FIVE minutes to research what we buy. Those five minutes would have told you at the very least that there was a buzz about upcoming announcements (not exactly a surprise event, either - they don't make a secret of MacWorld), and that the announcement about a move to intel had already been made.
Bleh. whine, whine, whine.
If you don't like your new computer, fine, but you can't expect any sympathy from us. Your current computer doesn't suddenly run slower, applications don't suddenly stop working, and, hopefully, you're not going to get any stupider. Hopefully, you learn from this, and enjoy what you thought was worth buying in the first place.
The decision that you made to buy, based on what you knew, hasn't changed. Hell, we all want the "If I knew then what I know now..." thing to work for us, but we can't go back and buy stocks before announcements, or wait before selling them, based on information we didn't have.
You had every opportunity to read some pretty clear writing on the wall and wait an extra 2 weeks.
You made the allusion that people that use OSX do so only for the 'look' of the OS. I was merely saying that the only negative points you brought up in the post were regarding the 'look' of OSX, not the usability, not the hardware.
How is it inconsistent to dislike things that try to be pretty for prettiness's sake?
Actually, I didn't mention any inconsistency - you brought that up. I merely stated that it was interesting - it wasn't meant to be a personal attack.
I find it interesting that you slam Macs for being "fashion computers" and in the same breath tell us that you would never buy a Mac because you "don't like the look of OSX"
Typical Corporate response: Fight the technology, instead of the real issue.
exactly... and what's worse is the media doesn't help things, either. Notice that the article is named "Impatient TV viewers turn to BitTorrent" and the slashdot take on it is "Aussie TV Networks Fight BitTorrent".
That makes as much sense as saying they're fighting ethernet or "Networks square off against mouse-users!"
There's a history of this in media ("Mother fights City Hall" etc.) but it's getting out of hand. In this case, it just polarizes the issue - the conflict here is between the Networks and the viewers/users. It's deals with piracy issue v. the availability issue.
It's not a fight that BitTorrent as a technology should have to take on.
Actually, I remember some of the books in the day, and they taught their techniques with dot or line patterns instead of colours. The solver would just have to assign colours to each pattern, so it didn't matter where the colours appeared in relation to each other.
I think the main reasoning behind it was to have it still be applicable to the many copycat cubes that were coming out, as well as the people who had changed their stickers around.
Slashdot Mirror
It comes down to this: buy a vehicle (house, phone, etc.) to fit your lifestyle, not to fit what you want your lifestyle to look like.
Thanks for the jab at my ability to think, based on whether I've had sex without birth control.
/actual/ utility vehicles long ago. But most SUVs I see are being used as station wagons.
And please make sure you get your SUV in the shot when you take that picture.
This comment and others like it are missing my point. I'm sure we can dig up hundreds of examples of people doing active things that justify the uber power that only the Escalade can provide, but I was commenting on the thousands of others driving around in the city or suburb, many times for a lone commute. I don't think there was anything wrong with a station wagon - it was built for a proper purpose, and does that job well. The SUV solves a problem that doesn't exist. We had
I'm able to get just as remote as I'd like with a car. I just make sure there's a good pair of boots or a canoe to take me the rest of the way.
You sound like you're active and trying to teach your kids to be the same, so it's not as applicable to you, but some people's "outdoor experience" is getting less and less remote because they drive right up to the freakin' thing. A walk in the woods does wonders, and keeps it there for our kids and grandkids to enjoy.
I'd like for you to be right, but the reality of it is that people will always pay for what they think is important. In this case, the idea of an SUV is very important to a lot of people.
The importance is, for most owners, a necessary expense. The SUV is essentially a face-saving minivan. Guys and girls who wake up one day realizing that they have 2.5 children and a hockey game or ballerina class to chauffeur around on saturday mornings need to feel like they haven't yet abandoned their youthful carefree lifestyle.
The SUV is a way to convince themselves that they are something they're not.
For the record, I don't think there's anything wrong with ending up with the kids and white picket fence. I think it's a problem when you try and ignore or cover it with your choice of vehicle.
quick summary of the posts in this thread, by first sentence:
"Unwilling"
No it isn't.
Rubbish.
Nonsense.
It's both - for example, not willing to be a slave is a very specific problem to an individual, as well as a greater problem. Although you can get into differing grades of importance (unwilling to have kids educated with others that don't share religion, or unwilling to eat at McDonald's when all of your friends go out), there's always the subjective and personal implications that people call up when they use the phrase "I'm unwilling to..."
It's just being contrary to say that someone's opinion of unsuitability is shared by nobody.
Besides, there's no indication that the original poster said he/she was speaking for anybody else.
wow... I was all set to say "YHBT HAND" yadda yadda, but it looks like he was serious. hell, he was serious enough to defend it by adding letters and spaces to get things to fit, even.
yep.
Am I crazy, or does that look like he's comparing himself to the rapist? Not exactly a favorable light, and definitely not the words of a stable man.
Actually, I think it's his whole point - these are the articles and stats that closely followed the tightening of restrictions on legal gun ownership - essentially not solving the problem, and only restricting the rights of the people that weren't the source of problems in the first place.
I got the message clearly - don't punish based on the object, punish based on the behaviour, be it guns, knives, cars, or lasers.
Am I the only one that's really pissed off that Microsoft actually requires you installing Silverlight just to view a bunch of jpegs? how hard can it be to screw up a simple previous comic button that they need this???
Why don't you guys all quite whining? It's just the Game of Life, is all.
From a moral standpoint, I agree that you should act in good faith. However, what's happening is akin to that clerk finding out his mistake a day later, and then going into your house to steal the balance.
/way/ they're trying to even the score, not whether they have a right to the returns.
They may have legal claim to the money, but not to an unauthorized charge on your credit card. If they're legally in the clear, the courts should be where they pursue it.
You can't do whatever you want just because someone owes you money. In this case, Amazon is interpreting the law themselves, and just taking the cash back. The transaction has gone beyond what checks they had in place, and is past where they can legally stop the transaction (indeed, they actually completed it themselves).
I think the main thing that bugs me is the
You may very well owe me $500, but I can't go and smash $500-worth of your windows, or steal your paycheck.
Thank you, thank you, thank you. I know people will say it has nothing to do with his points, but written communication follows a syntax - the more we deviate from that structure, the more chance we have of missing the point, and perpetuating bad usage.
Oh, and "their" was actually used correctly at one point - why did it stop? I can take the occasional typo (even a "word" typo), but there are just too many these days.
I find myself cringing a little bit more, each time.
To the poster, good points, but please take a bit more time and make it an even better post.
Oh, know.
that was panefull. Your never going too learn good speach like that. Were did you go to school?
Maybe I'm missing something, but did you just paraphrase the info that was already in the summary, just not as clearly?
I'm not making a crack or anything, just trying to see what the point was.
You, sir, are a tool.
I'm even surprised you've got the balls to post this on Slashdot, since most of us that make a $4000 purchase actually take at least FIVE minutes to research what we buy. Those five minutes would have told you at the very least that there was a buzz about upcoming announcements (not exactly a surprise event, either - they don't make a secret of MacWorld), and that the announcement about a move to intel had already been made.
Bleh. whine, whine, whine.
If you don't like your new computer, fine, but you can't expect any sympathy from us. Your current computer doesn't suddenly run slower, applications don't suddenly stop working, and, hopefully, you're not going to get any stupider. Hopefully, you learn from this, and enjoy what you thought was worth buying in the first place.
The decision that you made to buy, based on what you knew, hasn't changed. Hell, we all want the "If I knew then what I know now..." thing to work for us, but we can't go back and buy stocks before announcements, or wait before selling them, based on information we didn't have.
You had every opportunity to read some pretty clear writing on the wall and wait an extra 2 weeks.
You made the allusion that people that use OSX do so only for the 'look' of the OS. I was merely saying that the only negative points you brought up in the post were regarding the 'look' of OSX, not the usability, not the hardware.
How is it inconsistent to dislike things that try to be pretty for prettiness's sake?
Actually, I didn't mention any inconsistency - you brought that up. I merely stated that it was interesting - it wasn't meant to be a personal attack.
I find it interesting that you slam Macs for being "fashion computers" and in the same breath tell us that you would never buy a Mac because you "don't like the look of OSX"
wow... that's leading by example.
Thanks.
Typical Corporate response: Fight the technology, instead of the real issue.
exactly... and what's worse is the media doesn't help things, either. Notice that the article is named "Impatient TV viewers turn to BitTorrent" and the slashdot take on it is "Aussie TV Networks Fight BitTorrent".
That makes as much sense as saying they're fighting ethernet or "Networks square off against mouse-users!"
There's a history of this in media ("Mother fights City Hall" etc.) but it's getting out of hand. In this case, it just polarizes the issue - the conflict here is between the Networks and the viewers/users. It's deals with piracy issue v. the availability issue.
It's not a fight that BitTorrent as a technology should have to take on.
Add and multiply by the number of girlfriends.
yep, still comes out to 0
Mac users more savy? Is this the reason that they can't grasp the utility of a 2-button mouse, too? :)
No, it's the reason they don't become useless without a right-click. =]
Actually, I remember some of the books in the day, and they taught their techniques with dot or line patterns instead of colours. The solver would just have to assign colours to each pattern, so it didn't matter where the colours appeared in relation to each other.
I think the main reasoning behind it was to have it still be applicable to the many copycat cubes that were coming out, as well as the people who had changed their stickers around.
Don't worry, they're just using The Art Preposition.
ugh. Powerpoint. I get the feeling I'd be able to hear the horribly-designed templates.