"
Really? And it's not just as contemptuous to make up your mind about legality without case law to support you? (no, the 72 Nixon decision isn't conclusive and only partially applies because it didn't cover international suspects)"
I'm not as hip to the legal system as you are. I thought the stuff from the legislature would be good enough.
"Or, does the fact that it's Bush make it ok for you to ignore the courts and make up your own mind?"
You know what? You are right. Maybe I am a little biased against Bush. I think you are biased for Bush, and giving him a pass on an obvious mistake.
Well, since we are at a disagreement, and there is no established case law, surely you are in support of an impeachment to decide whether or not the President broke the law?
People aren't perfect -- people will cheat, bend, and break the rules. But, there is a difference between speeding and murdering, which you acknowledge.
Furthermore, I expect people in the government to have more respect for the law, and do a better job of upholding it. I don't think Bush is going to day "Gee, since lawpoop doesn't do any illegal downloading, I had better not do these wiretaps."
So I think you answered your own critique. I agree with you.
If I were you, I would question that assumption of service.
I suspect that the digital camera companies are building in a little planned obscelence in their digital cameras. Consumers are getting used to endless upgrades of software and electronics. Companies are crapping out electronic equipment that have no serviceable parts. When you're paying a Singapore person $2 an hour to run off batches of 1000 of these buggers, it probably will be cheaper to buy new (and get the latest, greatest technology) than to pay a qualified electrical engineer $80/hour to try to open a case on an item that is unserviceable anyway.
Remember these electronics are *tiny*. No human being can just open them and fix them. Companies have to actually plan each replaceable component. But what is thier incentive to have a repairable unit, when they could make a new sale? Consumers are already used to throwing out old electronics.
But it is not in the manufacturer's interest to make it last longer than one year. In fact, it is better for them to make last just past the warranty -- then they get to sell another camera.
Warranty length is not just a good guess, it's a science. Since the company does not want the financial responsility of thousands of equipment returns that are just before warranty expiration, they have a good idea of how long the materials will last under normal usage conditions. If they know the camera will last, on average, 2-1/2 years, they are not going to offer a 3 year warranty, because they will be stuck with thousands of returns. They will offer a 2 year warranty. And they are not going to spend the money to improve the engineering to make the camera last any longer than 2 years.
So I think warranty length is a good indication of the quality and lifetime of the item.
This is like that part in the movie or the comic book, where the guy is tripping out or whatever, and he's staring into the dark void of space, and then slowly he realizes he's staring into a GIANT FUCKING EYE!
If you agree that it's difficult to write illegible code in Python, and not difficult in Perl, then it's not a matter of likelihood, because code is not a random process. Writing code requires human effort, and if one type of code is more difficult than the other, you aren't going to get the harder type of code precisely because it's harder. In Perl, illegible code is as easy to make as legible code. In Python, it takes *more* effort to write illegible code.
Because, say you are trying to write illegible code. In Python, it's difficult. It Perl, it's easy. You will get more illegible code in Perl simply because it's easy, if that's your goal.
As a better example, say you are new to the game. You don't really know the difference between legible and illegible code. There's nothing preventing you from writing the illegible code in Perl, whereas there is in Python. You will get more illegible code from beginners in Perl, because it doesn't require any extra effort.
I think the thing is because electronic video games are relatively new. When they first came out, the only people into them were youngsters, because only youngsters are into new things.
Now that successive generations are growing up, those people who were once kids are now adults, and still into video games. The stereotype will change once those people start getting to be elderly. Then everyone will be into video games.
ID proponents are not interested in an honest review of the facts, in order to make up their mind as to which understanding is correct. If they even buy this bee story, they will simply drop this argument from their repertoire and find another one.
It seems to me that people already come into this 'debate' with their minds made up -- either you believe that 1.) God created everything, whenever, however, and it all goes back to him, regardless of how much we understand, or you believe that 2.) right now there's no evidence, nor any explanatory need for God or any other single creative force so there's no point in worrying about it. The details won't persuade people on either side.
Well, the thing is, if you're responding to a thread that has turned to relevance, you may not be aware that the thread originator was modded 'off-topic'. So there might be a long conversation of insightful, interesting threads that are also relevant, a replier may not know the original was modded down to '-1 off-topic' when they happily add their relevant and insightful $90.032. Boy are my fingers fat.
No, on-topic comments can follow an off-topic comment. There's nothing to controlling relevance in commentary.
For isntance, say someone replies to an off-topic post with another off-topic comment and an on-topic comment. Then, someone else replies to the on-topic comment.
Also, what if a post is actually on-topic, but the moderators don't get the obscure reference? It gets moderated as off-topic, but there is actual insightful commentary following.
The catch is that the "bays" part is a guy's name, and it is spelt 'bayes', and the E IN part takes one of the three common ways to spell it: 'ian'. So you get "bayesian"
If you need a trick, here's one: pretend the guy's name is Ian Bayes. Then, spell it like "Bayes, Ian", except remove the capitalization, comma, and space.
10 years ago, the CDs you were burning were of higher quality, were burned at a slower speed (probably 1x, 2x, or at max 4x), and the burning drive you were using was of a higher quality. You were using high-end equipment and media. Those CDs survived.
I bet that a consumer-grade CD burned last year on a consumer-grade drive purchased last year would not last as long.
How about the mods get flags for submitters who link to the same site too often? That way, someone who's always posting articles linking to their personal blogs gets flagged.
I agree with you. I'm not saying the US is above criticism. Obviously the United States is a very safe place to live, both in terms of personal safety and political expression. But there have been some extremely disconcerting recent developments, especially after the war on terror.
We do have to be vigilent in the protection of our rights in the US. Things can change *very* quickly policitically -- just look at Hitler's career and the rise of the third reich --
Uh oh! I have to go. Godwin's goons are knocking at my door!
Sounds like you've never visisted the third world. When you visit the police station to file a complaint, or get pulled over by a cop, do you expect to pay a bribe? That's standard operating procedure outside of Europe, North America, Austrailia, and Japan, etc.
If you decide to run against an incombant politicain, do you expect to get thrown in jail on trumped up charges? If you do get thrown in jail, do you expect to be regularly beaten by the guards?
Do American political dissidents ever just "dissapear" without a trace, with not a peep from the government, much less an investigation?
"I suppose there might be a few people in government who want to do what's right, but they're far outnumber by the power-grabbers. And, unless we get a lot more "common people" off their butts, the government responds more to the corporate lobbiests than to the common person."
Not so. Most people in the government are average Joe and Jane Beaurecrats. They are the lazy Federal employees. But, at least they aren't corrupt.
The power-hungry people are the elected congrespeople, Senators and perhaps the cabinet members. That's 535 congress people + 100 senators, + 1 president + 1 vice-president. Those people are far out-numbered by the bureaucrats.
" Or Khartoum, where people walk the city streets with Hyenas and Baboons on chains for personal protection
"If only hyenas and babboons could protect against Elephants and Donkeys."
You aren't seriously suggesting that Republican and Democratic political operatives are actually killing people on a daily basis, are you?
" When you start reducing legitimate democratic government, you have either corporations exploiting working people like in the US at the turn of the 20th century
"Don't you mean the turn of the 21st century? And the government (both parties) is in their pockets."
As bad as things are now, they were much worse 100 years ago. Before the FDA, you could basically sell poison onthe shelf as an exilir for any ailment. You could have a factory work fall into the meat processing machinery and everybody in Chicago can buy canned human flesh later that week. Mine workers would go into debt living in the Mine companies town, buying their food and renting their housing, and this after working 100 hour weeks with no vacation. Even 12 year old were working in the mines.
So basically, take your head out of your rear-end, get up out of your armchair, read some history, look at other countries in the world. Here in the US, we are living in a paradise.
Slashdot Mirror
" Really? And it's not just as contemptuous to make up your mind about legality without case law to support you? (no, the 72 Nixon decision isn't conclusive and only partially applies because it didn't cover international suspects)"
I'm not as hip to the legal system as you are. I thought the stuff from the legislature would be good enough.
"Or, does the fact that it's Bush make it ok for you to ignore the courts and make up your own mind?"
You know what? You are right. Maybe I am a little biased against Bush. I think you are biased for Bush, and giving him a pass on an obvious mistake.
Well, since we are at a disagreement, and there is no established case law, surely you are in support of an impeachment to decide whether or not the President broke the law?
People aren't perfect -- people will cheat, bend, and break the rules. But, there is a difference between speeding and murdering, which you acknowledge.
Furthermore, I expect people in the government to have more respect for the law, and do a better job of upholding it. I don't think Bush is going to day "Gee, since lawpoop doesn't do any illegal downloading, I had better not do these wiretaps."
So I think you answered your own critique. I agree with you.
If I were you, I would question that assumption of service.
I suspect that the digital camera companies are building in a little planned obscelence in their digital cameras. Consumers are getting used to endless upgrades of software and electronics. Companies are crapping out electronic equipment that have no serviceable parts. When you're paying a Singapore person $2 an hour to run off batches of 1000 of these buggers, it probably will be cheaper to buy new (and get the latest, greatest technology) than to pay a qualified electrical engineer $80/hour to try to open a case on an item that is unserviceable anyway.
Remember these electronics are *tiny*. No human being can just open them and fix them. Companies have to actually plan each replaceable component. But what is thier incentive to have a repairable unit, when they could make a new sale? Consumers are already used to throwing out old electronics.
But it is not in the manufacturer's interest to make it last longer than one year. In fact, it is better for them to make last just past the warranty -- then they get to sell another camera.
Warranty length is not just a good guess, it's a science. Since the company does not want the financial responsility of thousands of equipment returns that are just before warranty expiration, they have a good idea of how long the materials will last under normal usage conditions. If they know the camera will last, on average, 2-1/2 years, they are not going to offer a 3 year warranty, because they will be stuck with thousands of returns. They will offer a 2 year warranty. And they are not going to spend the money to improve the engineering to make the camera last any longer than 2 years.
So I think warranty length is a good indication of the quality and lifetime of the item.
So get congress to write a new bill, don't just charge ahead and break the law.
It just shows you Bush's comtempt for the rule of law. They couldn't do what they wanted to do legally, so they just went ahead and did it anyway.
Well, I'm not interested in shelling out a grand for a camera every year.
AND you will still have a working camera after 3 years, if you buy a film camera.
The digital cameras they are coming out with cost an arm and a leg, and they only have a one-year warranty. I call them disposable cameras.
This is like that part in the movie or the comic book, where the guy is tripping out or whatever, and he's staring into the dark void of space, and then slowly he realizes he's staring into a GIANT FUCKING EYE!
If you agree that it's difficult to write illegible code in Python, and not difficult in Perl, then it's not a matter of likelihood, because code is not a random process. Writing code requires human effort, and if one type of code is more difficult than the other, you aren't going to get the harder type of code precisely because it's harder. In Perl, illegible code is as easy to make as legible code. In Python, it takes *more* effort to write illegible code.
Because, say you are trying to write illegible code. In Python, it's difficult. It Perl, it's easy. You will get more illegible code in Perl simply because it's easy, if that's your goal.
As a better example, say you are new to the game. You don't really know the difference between legible and illegible code. There's nothing preventing you from writing the illegible code in Perl, whereas there is in Python. You will get more illegible code from beginners in Perl, because it doesn't require any extra effort.
In Perl, it is easy to make legible code, and it is easy to make illegible code.
In Python, it is easy to make legible code, but it is difficult to make illegible code.
I would argue that this fact makes it harder to write legible code in perl than in python.
I think the thing is because electronic video games are relatively new. When they first came out, the only people into them were youngsters, because only youngsters are into new things.
Now that successive generations are growing up, those people who were once kids are now adults, and still into video games. The stereotype will change once those people start getting to be elderly. Then everyone will be into video games.
Oh damn.
damn.
Making new works, especially with suffixes and prefixes, is a legal move.
ID proponents are not interested in an honest review of the facts, in order to make up their mind as to which understanding is correct. If they even buy this bee story, they will simply drop this argument from their repertoire and find another one.
It seems to me that people already come into this 'debate' with their minds made up -- either you believe that 1.) God created everything, whenever, however, and it all goes back to him, regardless of how much we understand, or you believe that 2.) right now there's no evidence, nor any explanatory need for God or any other single creative force so there's no point in worrying about it. The details won't persuade people on either side.
Well, the thing is, if you're responding to a thread that has turned to relevance, you may not be aware that the thread originator was modded 'off-topic'. So there might be a long conversation of insightful, interesting threads that are also relevant, a replier may not know the original was modded down to '-1 off-topic' when they happily add their relevant and insightful $90.032. Boy are my fingers fat.
How is this trolling? I'm trying to help parent spell better. Sheesus.
So how cheaply can I get into a Mac laptop now?
No, on-topic comments can follow an off-topic comment. There's nothing to controlling relevance in commentary.
For isntance, say someone replies to an off-topic post with another off-topic comment and an on-topic comment. Then, someone else replies to the on-topic comment.
Also, what if a post is actually on-topic, but the moderators don't get the obscure reference? It gets moderated as off-topic, but there is actual insightful commentary following.
Are you able to spell from sounding it out?
Here's how it goes:
BAYS E IN
The catch is that the "bays" part is a guy's name, and it is spelt 'bayes', and the E IN part takes one of the three common ways to spell it: 'ian'. So you get "bayesian"
If you need a trick, here's one: pretend the guy's name is Ian Bayes. Then, spell it like "Bayes, Ian", except remove the capitalization, comma, and space.
10 years ago, the CDs you were burning were of higher quality, were burned at a slower speed (probably 1x, 2x, or at max 4x), and the burning drive you were using was of a higher quality. You were using high-end equipment and media. Those CDs survived.
I bet that a consumer-grade CD burned last year on a consumer-grade drive purchased last year would not last as long.
How about the mods get flags for submitters who link to the same site too often? That way, someone who's always posting articles linking to their personal blogs gets flagged.
I don't know, could be like modern-day RAM where you lose it the instant you lose power.
Any person whos brain has been without oxygen for an extended period of time has come back with *major* personality changes and lost memories.
I agree with you. I'm not saying the US is above criticism. Obviously the United States is a very safe place to live, both in terms of personal safety and political expression. But there have been some extremely disconcerting recent developments, especially after the war on terror.
We do have to be vigilent in the protection of our rights in the US. Things can change *very* quickly policitically -- just look at Hitler's career and the rise of the third reich --
Uh oh! I have to go. Godwin's goons are knocking at my door!
"*spews Coke on monitor*"
Sounds like you've never visisted the third world. When you visit the police station to file a complaint, or get pulled over by a cop, do you expect to pay a bribe? That's standard operating procedure outside of Europe, North America, Austrailia, and Japan, etc.
If you decide to run against an incombant politicain, do you expect to get thrown in jail on trumped up charges? If you do get thrown in jail, do you expect to be regularly beaten by the guards?
Do American political dissidents ever just "dissapear" without a trace, with not a peep from the government, much less an investigation?
"I suppose there might be a few people in government who want to do what's right, but they're far outnumber by the power-grabbers. And, unless we get a lot more "common people" off their butts, the government responds more to the corporate lobbiests than to the common person." Not so. Most people in the government are average Joe and Jane Beaurecrats. They are the lazy Federal employees. But, at least they aren't corrupt.
The power-hungry people are the elected congrespeople, Senators and perhaps the cabinet members. That's 535 congress people + 100 senators, + 1 president + 1 vice-president. Those people are far out-numbered by the bureaucrats.
" Or Khartoum, where people walk the city streets with Hyenas and Baboons on chains for personal protection
"If only hyenas and babboons could protect against Elephants and Donkeys."
You aren't seriously suggesting that Republican and Democratic political operatives are actually killing people on a daily basis, are you?
" When you start reducing legitimate democratic government, you have either corporations exploiting working people like in the US at the turn of the 20th century
"Don't you mean the turn of the 21st century? And the government (both parties) is in their pockets."
As bad as things are now, they were much worse 100 years ago. Before the FDA, you could basically sell poison onthe shelf as an exilir for any ailment. You could have a factory work fall into the meat processing machinery and everybody in Chicago can buy canned human flesh later that week. Mine workers would go into debt living in the Mine companies town, buying their food and renting their housing, and this after working 100 hour weeks with no vacation. Even 12 year old were working in the mines.
So basically, take your head out of your rear-end, get up out of your armchair, read some history, look at other countries in the world. Here in the US, we are living in a paradise.
You, my friend, are right on.