Once you break the balance on a game, it never can recover.
I used to respond to unreasonable MUD feature requests with something along the lines of - "Ok, instead of x, let's put a big regenerating pile of gold in the starting room, and a lever to give you experience. Then you take the gold and pull the lever as much as you want. Fun, right?"
That's so silly that I have a hard time believing that you believe it.
Many evangelical Christians don't even consider Catholics to be Christian, citing the icons and saint worship as idolatrous and polytheistic. They also don't like the liturgy and the pomp of the services.
Gingrich's move was hardly a pragmatic political move, except inasmuch as no one is getting elected as a Republican as an atheist. He had to have a religion so he chose the one his wife liked. I'm sure he believes in a personal God, but I hardly can see him as any kind of religious freak.
This administration's political operatives have made clear that they are huge fans of Rove's work. The problem is that they aren't as good at it as he was. Rove was able to keep Bush popular (+50% approval) for almost 6 years. These people succeeded for about 1 year.
Now, they intend to use racial smears to replicate the Swift Boat strategy of 2004. Judging by their choice of topics and their past success, I don't see much hope down this road.
Newt is a pragmatist. He doesn't deserve to be labeled as a knee-jerk activist about anything. His views are just as mutable as Romney's have been. So is his religion, he converted to Catholicism in 2009. Hardly the M.O. of a religious nut.
The government's concern has little to do with how the USG appears - people will draw their own conclusions, as you just did. The concern was identifying sources. Information classification in large part has to do with concealing the source of intelligence information, as that revelation can have very negative impacts on the lifespan of the sources. If the sources can't trust you to keep secrets, they won't tell you anything. The utility is obvious.
I've often said, and maintain, that classified documents do not contain much more information than you get in open source journalism. It just names names, gives times and places with precision, and identifies sources. The level of precision scales with the classification label. Therefore, you'd draw mostly the same conclusions about the USG even without the classified disclosures.
It's not idiotic when you hold a clearance and have to submit to an investigation every 5 to 10 years.
Those who do not hold such clearances think it not a big deal to get speeding tickets, misdemeanor convictions for bullshit crimes or take a few hits off some weed. Those who actually hold same cannot be so careless.
This gentleman is the idiot. Apparently, he didn't like his livelihood so he quit his job in the most painful way possible, and could end up in prison.
Moreover, we were all instructed not to search for, read or refer to the Wikileaks data, as it would be treated as disclosing or misusing classified data. Apparently, this guy can't take a warning seriously.
I missed the part with the knives and bullets firing from the Hollerith machines.
I think you must've missed the part where the people doing the servicing were also German nationals working for the German subsidiary of IBM that would have been nationalized instantly if IBM had even attempted resistance from afar.
You leftists really lack critical thinking skills.
Someone else who read that hatchet job about IBM and the holocaust, I see. They supplied Hollerith card machines to Germany, so therefore what was done with them was IBM's fault. Great logic.
I'd substitute "forced sterilization" for the abstinence. Once effective tests for diseases with at least a component of genetic transmission are commonplace, someone's going to bring this up. Best warm up the ethical arguments now against this, we'll need them.
Netscape committed suicide also. They released a buggy as hell browser as v3. It turned me into a MSIE user for a short while, that's how bad it was. The white window thing, where it would fail to paint, should bring back memories. Their server product quickly grew stale compared to Apache. They had to know the revenue stream for a commodity interface like a web browser wouldn't last. People sold command shells back in the old days too...that didn't last. Bad business plan. Blaming Microsoft is hardly credible. It was a known quantity with a monopoly in OS at the time. One could have predicted the response.
The 'dirty tricks' were about as germane to the reason why Netscape went down as the stuff Nixon did was to his 1972 victory. He would have won anyway, and Netscape would have gone bankrupt anyway, too.
I'm very far from a Microsoft fan, but it's unfair to say that they used technical sabotage to destroy their opponents. You can talk about the lawsuits all day, but lawsuit claims are exaggerated, always. The thing about Microsoft's technical sabotage was always this: they didn't need to. The world was willingly walking toward creating a Microsoft monopoly. I don't think the sabotage helped much.
In regards to the particular victims...
-Stacker was a time-limited product, completely dependent on Microsoft, so of course they got eaten. All Microsoft had to do was to change their fs and Stacker was pretty much out of business. Bad business model. Should be a rule that you dont' create a model that depends on Microsoft.
-Novell committed suicide. Their licensing program (3.5" Novell-issued license floppies for each server, required for reinstall and the whole network squawks if you try to use the same one twice . Hope they didn't go bad in the interim...) needed massive modification to respond to Microsoft (xxx-111111 was a global license code for NT4) , and they didn't do it in time. Most shops went to NT just because it was easier to deal with. The Novell clients were pretty buggy too - that wasn't Microsoft's fault that they didn't make sure their code was bulletproof before it was issued.
-Lotus committed suicide. People didn't want to mix and match applications, they wanted a suite. Lotus didn't have one on offer till too late, and by then it was embedded inside IBM, where software innovation goes to hide. IBM couldn't market software out of a wet paper bag. Look what happened to Notes/Domino, a technically superior system to anything Microsoft had until just a few years ago. IBM licensing policies didn't help much there, either. Or OS/2...though there were more mistakes there than just poor marketing.
All of the above would have happened without Microsoft's sabotage. I'm far from denying that any of the sabotage happened. I'm just saying that it wasn't very consequential. It was just stupid and immature in my view.
There's no such thing as unbiased history. It's more biased than environmental science, even. Just some guy's opinion about stuff that happened long ago.
Most small businesses work by transferring the business income to the bottom line of the individual taxpayer, regardless of whether they incorporate or not.
Attack the small business owner on the personal tax bottom line and you kill jobs. They'll hobble the business before they cut their standard of living. They aren't running charities here.
It attacks the worldview of the left. It would invalidate their beliefs. They still believe that socialism can be made to promote the commonweal, despite all the evidence that it cannot. This proposal is a milder, kinder version of Stalin's assault on the kulaks in the 30s. We all know how this story ends.
When I see something like this, I immediately consider the breadth of my life experiences, and I cannot help but come to the conclusion that a hard lesson was missed by many.
No one is going to look out for you, period. Even your parents - as those of us old enough to see our parents retire and start to degenerate into childhood will witness, if not others. Everyone is self-interested. This means that anything collective is ultimately going to be manipulated to someone's benefit. The government is no exception.
Most people sit on their asses and expect "the system" to assure them of a good living within certain standards. Then they get pissed when they are manipulated and used by others who are actually playing the game, ie, the rich. So they take the lazy way out and vote a proxy, the government, to do the job for them. Then, when the government lines the pockets of those who participate in it, and nothing trickles down to you, maybe it'll be the fault of the individual politicians. You can keep telling yourself that. The reality is that it's always your fault that you're not doing better. You aren't playing the game.
Meanwhile, the government has been waging war against the rich, but you don't see any results. Because it's in their pockets, not yours.
Google will move its operations to countries where they have tax advantages. It's just going to happen. The existence of multinationals is a consequence of corporate tax policy across industrialized nations.
What I wonder is what they are thinking in Washington. First, there isn't enough money in million+ income hands to balance the budget. Not even close. Hell, you could take every dollar in profit every company in the US showed last year, and every cent of income from every millionaire, and you haven't even come close to closing the budget gap. Barely half, thinking of some presentation I saw not long ago.
This smells like more class warfare shit. They discredited Keynes by executing a lamebrained stimulus that didn't stimulate much, followed on by the printing of money that was QE/QE2, and now they'll tax the remaining producers into moving their assets out of the country. Maybe it'll get him re-elected, right? We'll worry about the economy in the 2nd term.
Let's assume that he did mislead people. He did no less than the AGW fanatics have done...try to stampede the stupid masses into believing there was (Gore, IPCC, AGW fanatics) or was not (Crichton, Rutan, etc) an emergency that needed a response. The "best" part is that, regardless of what you might think, your side has admitted repeatedly - even Al Gore did so - that they have been exaggerating the truth and have inadequate evidence of their conclusions. The objective is to get something political done. Truth is optional.
Essentially, your disdain for him amounts to a political argument with the guy. Even I don't waste time ripping on the swimmer (Ted Kennedy) anymore. Woops.
On the last page, in the last paragraph, he indicates that all of the data you just read through is shit and probably invalid. Turns out he was measuring the wrong place in the pipeline - before rendering - and what he measured doesn't track with the actual user experience.
Executing Manning isn't an assassination. It will be a penalty assessed through due process of law. This applies no matter how much you wish it was, and how many times you say it.
Slashdot Mirror
6. Get popped by an 'associate' of those you defrauded.
Once you break the balance on a game, it never can recover.
I used to respond to unreasonable MUD feature requests with something along the lines of - "Ok, instead of x, let's put a big regenerating pile of gold in the starting room, and a lever to give you experience. Then you take the gold and pull the lever as much as you want. Fun, right?"
That's so silly that I have a hard time believing that you believe it.
Many evangelical Christians don't even consider Catholics to be Christian, citing the icons and saint worship as idolatrous and polytheistic. They also don't like the liturgy and the pomp of the services.
Gingrich's move was hardly a pragmatic political move, except inasmuch as no one is getting elected as a Republican as an atheist. He had to have a religion so he chose the one his wife liked. I'm sure he believes in a personal God, but I hardly can see him as any kind of religious freak.
This administration's political operatives have made clear that they are huge fans of Rove's work. The problem is that they aren't as good at it as he was. Rove was able to keep Bush popular (+50% approval) for almost 6 years. These people succeeded for about 1 year.
Now, they intend to use racial smears to replicate the Swift Boat strategy of 2004. Judging by their choice of topics and their past success, I don't see much hope down this road.
Newt is a pragmatist. He doesn't deserve to be labeled as a knee-jerk activist about anything. His views are just as mutable as Romney's have been. So is his religion, he converted to Catholicism in 2009. Hardly the M.O. of a religious nut.
You forgot "protecting intelligence sources" which is probably over half the reason documents are classified.
The government's concern has little to do with how the USG appears - people will draw their own conclusions, as you just did. The concern was identifying sources. Information classification in large part has to do with concealing the source of intelligence information, as that revelation can have very negative impacts on the lifespan of the sources. If the sources can't trust you to keep secrets, they won't tell you anything. The utility is obvious.
I've often said, and maintain, that classified documents do not contain much more information than you get in open source journalism. It just names names, gives times and places with precision, and identifies sources. The level of precision scales with the classification label. Therefore, you'd draw mostly the same conclusions about the USG even without the classified disclosures.
It's not idiotic when you hold a clearance and have to submit to an investigation every 5 to 10 years.
Those who do not hold such clearances think it not a big deal to get speeding tickets, misdemeanor convictions for bullshit crimes or take a few hits off some weed. Those who actually hold same cannot be so careless.
This gentleman is the idiot. Apparently, he didn't like his livelihood so he quit his job in the most painful way possible, and could end up in prison.
Moreover, we were all instructed not to search for, read or refer to the Wikileaks data, as it would be treated as disclosing or misusing classified data. Apparently, this guy can't take a warning seriously.
I missed the part with the knives and bullets firing from the Hollerith machines.
I think you must've missed the part where the people doing the servicing were also German nationals working for the German subsidiary of IBM that would have been nationalized instantly if IBM had even attempted resistance from afar.
You leftists really lack critical thinking skills.
Someone else who read that hatchet job about IBM and the holocaust, I see. They supplied Hollerith card machines to Germany, so therefore what was done with them was IBM's fault. Great logic.
Type 1 diabetes here. I already reproduced, so a non-issue for me.
I'd substitute "forced sterilization" for the abstinence. Once effective tests for diseases with at least a component of genetic transmission are commonplace, someone's going to bring this up. Best warm up the ethical arguments now against this, we'll need them.
How much did you get paid to say that?
Netscape committed suicide also. They released a buggy as hell browser as v3. It turned me into a MSIE user for a short while, that's how bad it was. The white window thing, where it would fail to paint, should bring back memories. Their server product quickly grew stale compared to Apache. They had to know the revenue stream for a commodity interface like a web browser wouldn't last. People sold command shells back in the old days too...that didn't last. Bad business plan. Blaming Microsoft is hardly credible. It was a known quantity with a monopoly in OS at the time. One could have predicted the response.
The 'dirty tricks' were about as germane to the reason why Netscape went down as the stuff Nixon did was to his 1972 victory. He would have won anyway, and Netscape would have gone bankrupt anyway, too.
I'm very far from a Microsoft fan, but it's unfair to say that they used technical sabotage to destroy their opponents. You can talk about the lawsuits all day, but lawsuit claims are exaggerated, always. The thing about Microsoft's technical sabotage was always this: they didn't need to. The world was willingly walking toward creating a Microsoft monopoly. I don't think the sabotage helped much.
In regards to the particular victims...
-Stacker was a time-limited product, completely dependent on Microsoft, so of course they got eaten. All Microsoft had to do was to change their fs and Stacker was pretty much out of business. Bad business model. Should be a rule that you dont' create a model that depends on Microsoft.
-Novell committed suicide. Their licensing program (3.5" Novell-issued license floppies for each server, required for reinstall and the whole network squawks if you try to use the same one twice . Hope they didn't go bad in the interim...) needed massive modification to respond to Microsoft (xxx-111111 was a global license code for NT4) , and they didn't do it in time. Most shops went to NT just because it was easier to deal with. The Novell clients were pretty buggy too - that wasn't Microsoft's fault that they didn't make sure their code was bulletproof before it was issued.
-Lotus committed suicide. People didn't want to mix and match applications, they wanted a suite. Lotus didn't have one on offer till too late, and by then it was embedded inside IBM, where software innovation goes to hide. IBM couldn't market software out of a wet paper bag. Look what happened to Notes/Domino, a technically superior system to anything Microsoft had until just a few years ago. IBM licensing policies didn't help much there, either. Or OS/2...though there were more mistakes there than just poor marketing.
All of the above would have happened without Microsoft's sabotage. I'm far from denying that any of the sabotage happened. I'm just saying that it wasn't very consequential. It was just stupid and immature in my view.
I was there that day. There are divergences to every story that cannot be documented by unadulterated video. You were saying?
There's no such thing as unbiased history. It's more biased than environmental science, even. Just some guy's opinion about stuff that happened long ago.
Most small businesses work by transferring the business income to the bottom line of the individual taxpayer, regardless of whether they incorporate or not.
Attack the small business owner on the personal tax bottom line and you kill jobs. They'll hobble the business before they cut their standard of living. They aren't running charities here.
It is you that does not understand business.
It attacks the worldview of the left. It would invalidate their beliefs. They still believe that socialism can be made to promote the commonweal, despite all the evidence that it cannot. This proposal is a milder, kinder version of Stalin's assault on the kulaks in the 30s. We all know how this story ends.
When I see something like this, I immediately consider the breadth of my life experiences, and I cannot help but come to the conclusion that a hard lesson was missed by many.
No one is going to look out for you, period. Even your parents - as those of us old enough to see our parents retire and start to degenerate into childhood will witness, if not others. Everyone is self-interested. This means that anything collective is ultimately going to be manipulated to someone's benefit. The government is no exception.
Most people sit on their asses and expect "the system" to assure them of a good living within certain standards. Then they get pissed when they are manipulated and used by others who are actually playing the game, ie, the rich. So they take the lazy way out and vote a proxy, the government, to do the job for them. Then, when the government lines the pockets of those who participate in it, and nothing trickles down to you, maybe it'll be the fault of the individual politicians. You can keep telling yourself that. The reality is that it's always your fault that you're not doing better. You aren't playing the game.
Meanwhile, the government has been waging war against the rich, but you don't see any results. Because it's in their pockets, not yours.
Google will move its operations to countries where they have tax advantages. It's just going to happen. The existence of multinationals is a consequence of corporate tax policy across industrialized nations.
What I wonder is what they are thinking in Washington. First, there isn't enough money in million+ income hands to balance the budget. Not even close. Hell, you could take every dollar in profit every company in the US showed last year, and every cent of income from every millionaire, and you haven't even come close to closing the budget gap. Barely half, thinking of some presentation I saw not long ago.
This smells like more class warfare shit. They discredited Keynes by executing a lamebrained stimulus that didn't stimulate much, followed on by the printing of money that was QE/QE2, and now they'll tax the remaining producers into moving their assets out of the country. Maybe it'll get him re-elected, right? We'll worry about the economy in the 2nd term.
Let's assume that he did mislead people. He did no less than the AGW fanatics have done...try to stampede the stupid masses into believing there was (Gore, IPCC, AGW fanatics) or was not (Crichton, Rutan, etc) an emergency that needed a response. The "best" part is that, regardless of what you might think, your side has admitted repeatedly - even Al Gore did so - that they have been exaggerating the truth and have inadequate evidence of their conclusions. The objective is to get something political done. Truth is optional.
Essentially, your disdain for him amounts to a political argument with the guy. Even I don't waste time ripping on the swimmer (Ted Kennedy) anymore. Woops.
On the last page, in the last paragraph, he indicates that all of the data you just read through is shit and probably invalid. Turns out he was measuring the wrong place in the pipeline - before rendering - and what he measured doesn't track with the actual user experience.
I'd like my 5 minutes back, please.
Executing Manning isn't an assassination. It will be a penalty assessed through due process of law. This applies no matter how much you wish it was, and how many times you say it.