'the new monitors provide a protective black bezel acrylic screen with flexible silver cabinet and stand that adjusts to a variety of angles including flat against its base'
This 'portable monitor', isn't anything more than a screen with a base that can collapse. No folding screen. LCD's do not lend themselves to that kind of abuse and, if you read the article, it says that is only folds into the base, the display itself does not fold. Gimmick, gimmick.
That your boss would have to be the admin for the server running the teleconferencing. He might end up being the only one with a gun.
More importantly, I think that we could look at a new low cost method of tourism, or virtual field trips for schools wealthy enough to get into the equipment to do a whole class (20+ students at one time).
"Pay attention class, today we will be going to visit the Pyramids at Giza"
Why is it ignorant? Many people want to extend the limits of speech out forever, with no bounds whatsoever, I merely wish to limit unregulated speech to cover that which has an effect in the political arena. This was the area in which we were being oppressed when the Constitution was written and it was worded to cover that quite well. As we have opened up as a society we have interpreted this quite liberally. Maybe you lash out because you dislike that I am more conservative in this area? (I am not taking offense, mind you, it is always good to have arguments critiqued, especially when it is approached with intelligence).
Let me ask you this: Why can we not destroy tabloids that obviously prey upon the fears and gossips in our society, with little regard to well-researched stories? Journalism has become so well guarded that even those who routinely disregard fact for sesationalism cannot be stopped.
Now, in looking back at what we have said, might it be that art (cultural) and things such as personal speech might be considered to not have been addressed by the Constitution in a direct fashion, rather than having been ignored? Remember that literacy beyond that necessary to read a newspaper was (and still might be) rare in their day and so novels were not top on their list of priorities.
Why does everyone seem to think that the right to free speech covers everything a body might want to say about anything? Is no one here aware of the history of newspapers in the 1800's getting their type strewn into the street for publishing poorly researched and/or slanderous material? This only became a bad thing when people decided that porn (nudie mags, take your pick) was covered by free speech! I say that it is not!
The Constitution was written to cover political, not private, speech. Speaking out against or for the government and its policies (local to federal) is what is covered by the Constitution. Not John Doe wanting to publish his version of Debbie does Dallas!
Current interpretation of the laws puts us where we are, not the laws themselves. This is why there are bitter partisan fights in congress about who gets assigned to what seat on the Supreme Court (and the lower courts).
Why not give porn it's own.prn addressing? Make the laws such that draconian measures would be taken against those who violate them (drawn and quartering is a good start) and simply work out the details (I don't know squat about porn sites). Those outside of the nation that don't want to conform . . . can't we invade?:) Maybe it is time for the Army to online with combat and begin electronic only attacks on those countries that promote or allow such things. Much better to do that than involve all of those messy bombs and guns. Less blood, too, come to think of it.
The plastic fibers that are out there are going to made of PMMA and can only operate at temperatures of 85c. Admittedly, this does not limit the real world applications, but IMHO we can also infer that existing PMMA cable distorts/attenuates ? the signal over longer distances, thus making a 'purer' transmission of data viable over a greater distance. Remember that items such as TOSlink are quite short.
Re:Other People's Rights
on
Want Freedom?
·
· Score: 1
Temptation is everywhere. It is very tempting to go along with racial profiling because it works! You go looking for a particular behaviour that you tend to find in X group and when you watch only X group you can catch more of them doing Y action. Very tempting thoughts, but it leaves out the fact that those of X group that don't participate in Y behaviour are having their rights violated (like the taped private conversations of two 'mobsters' that never mention any illegal activity whatsoever).
Slashdot Mirror
This 'portable monitor', isn't anything more than a screen with a base that can collapse. No folding screen. LCD's do not lend themselves to that kind of abuse and, if you read the article, it says that is only folds into the base, the display itself does not fold. Gimmick, gimmick.
That your boss would have to be the admin for the server running the teleconferencing. He might end up being the only one with a gun. More importantly, I think that we could look at a new low cost method of tourism, or virtual field trips for schools wealthy enough to get into the equipment to do a whole class (20+ students at one time). "Pay attention class, today we will be going to visit the Pyramids at Giza"
Why is it ignorant? Many people want to extend the limits of speech out forever, with no bounds whatsoever, I merely wish to limit unregulated speech to cover that which has an effect in the political arena. This was the area in which we were being oppressed when the Constitution was written and it was worded to cover that quite well. As we have opened up as a society we have interpreted this quite liberally. Maybe you lash out because you dislike that I am more conservative in this area? (I am not taking offense, mind you, it is always good to have arguments critiqued, especially when it is approached with intelligence).
Let me ask you this: Why can we not destroy tabloids that obviously prey upon the fears and gossips in our society, with little regard to well-researched stories? Journalism has become so well guarded that even those who routinely disregard fact for sesationalism cannot be stopped.
Now, in looking back at what we have said, might it be that art (cultural) and things such as personal speech might be considered to not have been addressed by the Constitution in a direct fashion, rather than having been ignored? Remember that literacy beyond that necessary to read a newspaper was (and still might be) rare in their day and so novels were not top on their list of priorities.
Why does everyone seem to think that the right to free speech covers everything a body might want to say about anything? Is no one here aware of the history of newspapers in the 1800's getting their type strewn into the street for publishing poorly researched and/or slanderous material? This only became a bad thing when people decided that porn (nudie mags, take your pick) was covered by free speech! I say that it is not!
The Constitution was written to cover political, not private, speech. Speaking out against or for the government and its policies (local to federal) is what is covered by the Constitution. Not John Doe wanting to publish his version of Debbie does Dallas!
Current interpretation of the laws puts us where we are, not the laws themselves. This is why there are bitter partisan fights in congress about who gets assigned to what seat on the Supreme Court (and the lower courts).
Why not give porn it's own .prn addressing? Make the laws such that draconian measures would be taken against those who violate them (drawn and quartering is a good start) and simply work out the details (I don't know squat about porn sites). Those outside of the nation that don't want to conform . . . can't we invade? :) Maybe it is time for the Army to online with combat and begin electronic only attacks on those countries that promote or allow such things. Much better to do that than involve all of those messy bombs and guns. Less blood, too, come to think of it.
The plastic fibers that are out there are going to made of PMMA and can only operate at temperatures of 85c. Admittedly, this does not limit the real world applications, but IMHO we can also infer that existing PMMA cable distorts/attenuates ? the signal over longer distances, thus making a 'purer' transmission of data viable over a greater distance. Remember that items such as TOSlink are quite short.
Temptation is everywhere. It is very tempting to go along with racial profiling because it works! You go looking for a particular behaviour that you tend to find in X group and when you watch only X group you can catch more of them doing Y action. Very tempting thoughts, but it leaves out the fact that those of X group that don't participate in Y behaviour are having their rights violated (like the taped private conversations of two 'mobsters' that never mention any illegal activity whatsoever).