In Pearl, Mississippi, young Luke Woodham was stopped from further mayhem by a gun-toting principal.
Columbine would have been quite a different story if there was a teacher there who was carrying concealed. In fact, if it was common knowledge that there were unknown numbers of teachers who could bring the Columbine shooters down with their weapons, Tweedle-dead and Tweedle-deader would even now be sullenly skipping bowling-league practice and listening to crap emo music.
While the declining PDA sales are a result of PDA functions being added to cell phones, I'm not entirely sanguine about the convergence devices. True, I would like to have a device that kept all my appointments, notes, e-books, and that I could use to call the wife or listen to music, but that ends up being a $600 device that is both fragile and wont to fall out of my pocket and into the toilet.
Not to mention that as you move up the usability ladder, as defined by "screen size", you start looking like a fool talking into a brick.
My needs currently are for a phone to talk on and a portable computer to answer email or make quick changes to a server config or PHP script. The Treo serves this decently well, but again--the toilet issue. I drop my phone a lot, and the lighter and less fragile the phone is, the better off I am.
What I'm looking at now is the Nokia 6822 (assuming I can get one, it being a non-USA phone) and the Zodiac Tapwave. Seperate devices, sure, but the Nokia can act as a SSH terminal in a pinch, or I can use it to connect the Zodiac to the T-Mobile GPRS network over Bluetooth, with or without a foldable keyboard. Or, in the final mobile solution, use the Nokia to connect my TiBook via GPRS. That's a continuity of ability from super-lightweight to full-on mobile office in easy increments.
(I like the Zodiac for it's metal body, huge screen and big battery. Reasonably durable, not horribly expensive, 1/2 VGA screen for easy use, and I'm likely to make it a full day with somewhat heavy use on a single charge.)
Purely one man's opinion, but I like FreeBSD for servers.
1) It has a logical (and largely stable) layout for configuration files. It's rare that you're surprised where something is located.
2) The ports tree makes for very easy system administration. You will love using the ports tree.
3) Deep down inside, FreeBSD wants to be administered via the commandline. This may be a real weakness if you're all about the pointy-clicky, but for me, it's a lifesaver.
If I can get to a computer, I can get a SSH program for it. From there, I can admin any FreeBSD system I have. Linux seems to want to be admined via GUIs. While you certainly can admin a Linux box via the commandline, when you start looking at their manuals, they show you screenshots of pointers and windows and checkboxes. The FreeBSD manual is full of commands and config files.
Potential downside: I'm having a long-term love affair with LDAP, but there isn't really any curses-based LDAP administration tool. If you want LDAP, you'll have to get extra-familiar with the commandline ldap tools, or install something like phpLDAPAdmin.
Potential upside to offset the downside: being able to resurrect a mail server from a J2EE SSH client on your cell phone will get you all the chicks, no shit.
If you can't sell FreeBSD, or you need Linux's better support for 64-bit, Big Iron servers (> 16 processors, scads of RAM, etc.), RedHat seems to me to be the only real contender. RedHat offers (very reasonable) prices for decent support; they've been around a long time, and it shows--some people may not like RedHat, but every sysadmin worth anything has spent at least some time with RedHat, and that familiarity means that your company isn't doomed if you get hit by a bus; and if you don't want to pay for RedHat EL, you can grab CentOS and get the same thing for free, sans support of course. SuSE and others are fine, but I would be more secure knowing that if worst comes to worst, you can hire some spendy RedHat consultant to pull your chestnuts out of the fire, like a ghetto Sun service contract.
(At some point, you may do better to go with Sun. Sun hardware is expensive, Solaris is a huge pain in the ass, but a good Sun/Solaris admin is worth his weight in gold--maybe more. If your needs are complex and/or uptime-dependant, a Sun consultation is worth much more than the measly chump change you'll save by cheaping out.)
First I figured that you were simply a real asshole. Now, I think you're just a troll. I'll feed you just once more before I get back to picking my nose, scratching my ass, or whatever else I can come up with that's more edifying than bantering with you.
First, let's touch on the blinding irony in a 6-digit Slashdot UID telling a 4-digit Slashdot UID about Slashdot's "good old days". No wait, don't tell me--you "forgot your password" for your original nick, UID 7. Or maybe you were "tired of the other name", so you went with the ever meaningful "Lord Apathy".
Second, you can still store several weeks of intelligent conversations on a 40MB hard drive. You may not be aware of it, but text is lightweight and highly compressible. Or do you mean to imply that you used to serve a feed over UUCP? Somehow I find it more likely that you invented Usenet than that you were capable of configuring the files neccessary to set up a net-news server without riddling it with unparsable (or disastrous) spelling errors. You'll have to forgive if I call bullshit on you.
Third, it took precisely 8 seconds before somebody figured out how to post binaries to Usenet--in a format that increased the size of the binaries by approximately 25% or so. Nobody was complaining about correction posts so long as alt.binaries.whatever existed. Unless you're trying to imply that you were around when Usenet was two VAXen connected by baling wire. Since the only people using Usenet way back in the day were academics, your execrable spelling puts the lie to that claim. (I know that, now, total morons can get into Duke and UNC so long as they can throw a football or make a basket, but we're talking 1980 here.)
Fourth, I'm quite easy about spelling and grammar mistakes, so long as they aren't made by pompous shitheads (that's you). There are plenty of intelligent convos to be had, even on Slashdot, so long as you don't start your side of it with "Well, I know you're stupid and I'm smart, but..."
Fifth, don't let the door hit you where the Good Lord split you. May I suggest IRC--nobody will correct your stupid mistakes there as they're too concerned about getting posted on bash.org.
Well, to be fair, the original Galactica wasn't intended to be a series at all, just a mini-series. It was really popular, so they said "everybody come back, we'll have scripts when you get here," and that turned out to be a big overstatement. Plots and episodes were bolted on at the last minute, which contributed to the ADD quality. Toss in the matter of it being 1978 and all, with special effects that came out of a CrackerJack box by neccessity, you're lucky there was anything to watch at all.
Anyway, you did have to wonder why they were so scared of the Cylons. Every show (that had Cylons in them, anyway) consisted of the Colonials kicking their ass. It was a bit hard to buy, but then I was six when Galactica was on TV. I loved every minute of it.
Who gives a fuck what you are he was referriing too? On Usenet it is bad manners to correct someone over bad grammer and bad spelling.
It's worse manners to rail against people for being unintelligent, even to the point of holding yourself up as a paragon of wit and relevance, when you make egregious mistakes in simple spelling and basic grammar.
Plus, you sound like you has never been on Usenet. Spelling/Grammar flames are pretty common--it's not that they're considered rude, it's that they're considered lame.
Politicians have been spending the SS income rather than investing it for years now.
Just wanted to note this. The government can't invest SS revenues. In fact, the government can't do anything with SS revenues other than spend it. (Please note that SS revenues are not distinct from general tax revenues, they're just labled as such when it gets taken out of your check. All the money goes into the general fund.) This is because the government doesn't have the same relationship with money as you or I do.
When the gov't receives tax revenue, it has to spend it, one way or another. If the gov't took your money and put it in a bank, like a lot of people (naively, but understandably) think they do with SS revenues, it is effectively removing currency from circulation, with all the bad economic consequences implicit therein. Thus, the SS "surplus" is merely the money that the government has taken in taxes and used to buy government T-bills, which the government then promises to pay back with interest. If it sounds a little absurd that's because it is.
SS as it currently works isn't that bad a system (assuming that the citizenry were given a chance to vote on whether or not they want it) so long as you recognize it as what it is: income redistribution from young workers to old retired workers. As long as there are enough young workers per old retired workers, the individual impact isn't so bad. The problem will come when the Baby Boomers retire, and there are only 2 young workers for every 1 old retired Boomer. To put that in direct monetary terms: say benefits today are $600/month. You'll have to cough up $300-400/month (don't forget beaurocratic overhead!) in SS taxes to pay your share.
Somebody noted that you could raise taxes on upper-incomes from 33% to 35% to pay SS. To be perfectly fair, the revenues to save SS should come from SS taxes, which you stop paying SS taxes at $88,000/yr (I think. I'm close, anyway.) Income taxes are supposed to pay for other gov't functions, not SS. But I suppose I should be glad that people are coming around to the realization that SS taxes are just like regular taxes, and that 33-to-35 notion (quietly) acknowledges that fact.
Want to save SS? Means-test benefits. Old folks are among the richest among us. Rich old shitpokes in Sun City shouldn't get a dime of SS or Medicare, but they do. In fact, they have to. You can't not get Medicare. My parents are very well off. They're on Medicare now. They don't have an option.
That is incredibly stupid, and that's why SS is in the situation it's in.
(I find it funny that the same group of people who think there's "no crisis", when there is ample evidence to prove otherwise, are the same folks who think there is a "global warming crisis", and want to take all kinds of economy-wrecking measures to defend against what could charitably described as "sub-optimal science", or "bunk" if you're not terribly PC.)
I used to be a big proponent of GUI-fying the config files for GNU/Linux, back when I gave a flip about Linux which was before I found FreeBSD.
Anyway, after some time with the various GUI-fied config files, I'm sick to fucking death of them, because I (naturally, I suppose) assumed it would work out as well as a Mac. It never occurred to me that the nerds who would be doing the GUI-fication would be the kinds of nerds who received their GUI education largely by looking at Windows. Thus, they all simply slapped a smiley-face onto a dotfile, with the result being horrific user interaction combined with the added joy of a poorly-programmed script failing to actually update the dotfile (or worse, silently corrupting it into a non-functioning state).
Now, I prefer to edit config files directly. Partially because it is easier and more convenient for me to SSH into various machines to make these changes, but mostly because I am now very familiar with them due to my previous poor experiences with GUI-fied tools forcing me to learn the syntax of the various dotfiles.
Oh, and I hate the way some play-pretty tools simply add on to the end of a config file, since the program will only care about the last set value./stand/sysinstall does this to FreeBSD's/etc/rc.conf. It means you have to look through the entire file to make sure your config change isn't getting overwritten three screensful down (or exaccerbate the problem by appending your changes to the end all willy-nilly yourself).
The FX5200 is supported, but is the 5200Go flavor supported? That I don't know.
Nothing's keeping Apple from expanding Core Image to support the 9200, and the Mini may be the very thing to shove them into doing so, which will make a lot of iBook users happy.
I didn't think of that, but it could come true. The Mac Mini is perfect for schools.
I immediately thought, "this is perfect for corporate needs." With the Xserve hardware, Xsan, their work in adopting and adapting Free software for intrusion detection and security, once you add in an inexpensive client, you've got a (non-partisan) IT department's dream.
Why use Linux? If you have a Mac already, you can use the remote desktop to admin it graphically. If not, well... it runs a Unixalike already. You won't get that much of a speed boost from Linux at the cost of having to beta test drivers for the hardware.
If you do go this route, and install Mac OS X Server, you'll be in the unique position of paying more for your server license than for your server hardware!
I've got 10.3 running on a clamshell iBook with 128MB RAM. 300mhz G3. It runs pretty well, considering. All it runs is Safari, basically--it's the living-room computer that my wife uses to browse message boards during commercials or whatever.
For most users, 512MB would be plenty. I'm doing fairly intensive Web development (Photoshop, BBEdit, Illustrator, etc.) on a 667mhz G4 with 768MB RAM. Works just fine.
Wow, did Apple also nuke NewEgg.com from orbit today? No? That this machine doesn't suit your needs or wants is fine. No, really, you won't get beat up by a gang of turtlenecked art-fags with their hair fashionably mussed if you don't buy the Mac Mini.
No, "bitter" usually implies that I didn't get what I want. I got what I want, and I'm happy. The other guy is bitter. I'm simply pissed off that he's an whiny sumbitch.
Going down that "decent video card" route leads to madness. Want a decent video card? Get a G5. That's what they're there for. The Radeon 9200 isn't a barn-burner, but... so? I just recently upgraded from a GeForce 2 MX, so what do I know. Apple has a good relationship with ATI, and the 9200 is a well-established integrated graphics GPU--a requirement for the Mac Mini, since it is likely that everything is on the system board. It also looks like the Mini doesn't have a fan, so heat is also an issue.
Low-end Macs have low-end graphics. So do low-end PCs. Yes, PCs can be upgraded with an AGP card, but they're not tiny little boxes you can hide behind a photo of your mom.
well for a company that is so intune to the customer and providing quality. why the fuck did they ever build that mouse in the first place.
(Quoted because nobody reads at Threshold < 2 unless they're jobless gits, and thus nobody can see this genius's "contribution".[1]) Because Apple ran usability tests to determine that a symmetrical, one-button mouse is easier to use. They weren't just guessing, you moron. Ask a lefty presented with one of those Microsoft contoured mice if the Apple designers were right or not.
[1] I read it because I clicked on the "3 replies below your threshold" link as I am interested in what people have said in reply to my comment. This footnote is here to forestall the snide riposte "u ReD iT, u MuSt Be A lUsRRR!!!!!1" from some fat asshole nerd, as he returns to fondling his dick through his pants pocket.
No, the rich sell to the poor. And the poor, since they're in a capitalist country, are buying. There is nothing keeping the poor from selling something that people want to other poor people--it's just that, by and large, poor people aren't smart enough or hard-working enough to bother. Which is why they're poor, at least in this country.
All systems are fucked up. Some are fucked up worse than others. The perfect system does not exist and will never exist. Capitalism, or at least the Jesus-laden, love-thy-neighbor version we have in America, is better than most.
If you're going to compare to the EU, let's go all the way. The EU has a declining birthrate and a large number of people on the verge of retirement. Their socialist systems will implode under their own weight.
Let's also mention military might. The EU spends about $0.35/year on their military budget, and that's why when some asshole in Absurdistan starts massacring people, the EU sends a platoon of potato peelers and the US sends 20 battallions of armed and trained Marines.
The EU socialist-lite system works because it depends on the charity of the American military.
A variation of the original argument--it's a good system implemented poorly. What you're saying, basically, is that Communism will be great, but that you don't have any proof, since it's never been tried. However, American capitalism has been proven to be pretty good, all things considered. Perfect? No, but it's a proven solution.
Now, tell me why we should trust your unproven, guesswork economic system? Because it sounds good?
Slashdot Mirror
Columbine would have been quite a different story if there was a teacher there who was carrying concealed. In fact, if it was common knowledge that there were unknown numbers of teachers who could bring the Columbine shooters down with their weapons, Tweedle-dead and Tweedle-deader would even now be sullenly skipping bowling-league practice and listening to crap emo music.
Which is another way of saying, "Bring back Saddam! We liked him!"
Not to mention that as you move up the usability ladder, as defined by "screen size", you start looking like a fool talking into a brick.
My needs currently are for a phone to talk on and a portable computer to answer email or make quick changes to a server config or PHP script. The Treo serves this decently well, but again--the toilet issue. I drop my phone a lot, and the lighter and less fragile the phone is, the better off I am.
What I'm looking at now is the Nokia 6822 (assuming I can get one, it being a non-USA phone) and the Zodiac Tapwave. Seperate devices, sure, but the Nokia can act as a SSH terminal in a pinch, or I can use it to connect the Zodiac to the T-Mobile GPRS network over Bluetooth, with or without a foldable keyboard. Or, in the final mobile solution, use the Nokia to connect my TiBook via GPRS. That's a continuity of ability from super-lightweight to full-on mobile office in easy increments.
(I like the Zodiac for it's metal body, huge screen and big battery. Reasonably durable, not horribly expensive, 1/2 VGA screen for easy use, and I'm likely to make it a full day with somewhat heavy use on a single charge.)
1) It has a logical (and largely stable) layout for configuration files. It's rare that you're surprised where something is located.
2) The ports tree makes for very easy system administration. You will love using the ports tree.
3) Deep down inside, FreeBSD wants to be administered via the commandline. This may be a real weakness if you're all about the pointy-clicky, but for me, it's a lifesaver.
If I can get to a computer, I can get a SSH program for it. From there, I can admin any FreeBSD system I have. Linux seems to want to be admined via GUIs. While you certainly can admin a Linux box via the commandline, when you start looking at their manuals, they show you screenshots of pointers and windows and checkboxes. The FreeBSD manual is full of commands and config files.
Potential downside: I'm having a long-term love affair with LDAP, but there isn't really any curses-based LDAP administration tool. If you want LDAP, you'll have to get extra-familiar with the commandline ldap tools, or install something like phpLDAPAdmin.
Potential upside to offset the downside: being able to resurrect a mail server from a J2EE SSH client on your cell phone will get you all the chicks, no shit.
If you can't sell FreeBSD, or you need Linux's better support for 64-bit, Big Iron servers (> 16 processors, scads of RAM, etc.), RedHat seems to me to be the only real contender. RedHat offers (very reasonable) prices for decent support; they've been around a long time, and it shows--some people may not like RedHat, but every sysadmin worth anything has spent at least some time with RedHat, and that familiarity means that your company isn't doomed if you get hit by a bus; and if you don't want to pay for RedHat EL, you can grab CentOS and get the same thing for free, sans support of course. SuSE and others are fine, but I would be more secure knowing that if worst comes to worst, you can hire some spendy RedHat consultant to pull your chestnuts out of the fire, like a ghetto Sun service contract.
(At some point, you may do better to go with Sun. Sun hardware is expensive, Solaris is a huge pain in the ass, but a good Sun/Solaris admin is worth his weight in gold--maybe more. If your needs are complex and/or uptime-dependant, a Sun consultation is worth much more than the measly chump change you'll save by cheaping out.)
First, let's touch on the blinding irony in a 6-digit Slashdot UID telling a 4-digit Slashdot UID about Slashdot's "good old days". No wait, don't tell me--you "forgot your password" for your original nick, UID 7. Or maybe you were "tired of the other name", so you went with the ever meaningful "Lord Apathy".
Second, you can still store several weeks of intelligent conversations on a 40MB hard drive. You may not be aware of it, but text is lightweight and highly compressible. Or do you mean to imply that you used to serve a feed over UUCP? Somehow I find it more likely that you invented Usenet than that you were capable of configuring the files neccessary to set up a net-news server without riddling it with unparsable (or disastrous) spelling errors. You'll have to forgive if I call bullshit on you.
Third, it took precisely 8 seconds before somebody figured out how to post binaries to Usenet--in a format that increased the size of the binaries by approximately 25% or so. Nobody was complaining about correction posts so long as alt.binaries.whatever existed. Unless you're trying to imply that you were around when Usenet was two VAXen connected by baling wire. Since the only people using Usenet way back in the day were academics, your execrable spelling puts the lie to that claim. (I know that, now, total morons can get into Duke and UNC so long as they can throw a football or make a basket, but we're talking 1980 here.)
Fourth, I'm quite easy about spelling and grammar mistakes, so long as they aren't made by pompous shitheads (that's you). There are plenty of intelligent convos to be had, even on Slashdot, so long as you don't start your side of it with "Well, I know you're stupid and I'm smart, but..."
Fifth, don't let the door hit you where the Good Lord split you. May I suggest IRC--nobody will correct your stupid mistakes there as they're too concerned about getting posted on bash.org.
Anyway, you did have to wonder why they were so scared of the Cylons. Every show (that had Cylons in them, anyway) consisted of the Colonials kicking their ass. It was a bit hard to buy, but then I was six when Galactica was on TV. I loved every minute of it.
It's worse manners to rail against people for being unintelligent, even to the point of holding yourself up as a paragon of wit and relevance, when you make egregious mistakes in simple spelling and basic grammar.
Plus, you sound like you has never been on Usenet. Spelling/Grammar flames are pretty common--it's not that they're considered rude, it's that they're considered lame.
In other (smaller) words, you have been pWn3d.
This is one of the best comments ever.
Just wanted to note this. The government can't invest SS revenues. In fact, the government can't do anything with SS revenues other than spend it. (Please note that SS revenues are not distinct from general tax revenues, they're just labled as such when it gets taken out of your check. All the money goes into the general fund.) This is because the government doesn't have the same relationship with money as you or I do.
When the gov't receives tax revenue, it has to spend it, one way or another. If the gov't took your money and put it in a bank, like a lot of people (naively, but understandably) think they do with SS revenues, it is effectively removing currency from circulation, with all the bad economic consequences implicit therein. Thus, the SS "surplus" is merely the money that the government has taken in taxes and used to buy government T-bills, which the government then promises to pay back with interest. If it sounds a little absurd that's because it is.
SS as it currently works isn't that bad a system (assuming that the citizenry were given a chance to vote on whether or not they want it) so long as you recognize it as what it is: income redistribution from young workers to old retired workers. As long as there are enough young workers per old retired workers, the individual impact isn't so bad. The problem will come when the Baby Boomers retire, and there are only 2 young workers for every 1 old retired Boomer. To put that in direct monetary terms: say benefits today are $600/month. You'll have to cough up $300-400/month (don't forget beaurocratic overhead!) in SS taxes to pay your share.
Somebody noted that you could raise taxes on upper-incomes from 33% to 35% to pay SS. To be perfectly fair, the revenues to save SS should come from SS taxes, which you stop paying SS taxes at $88,000/yr (I think. I'm close, anyway.) Income taxes are supposed to pay for other gov't functions, not SS. But I suppose I should be glad that people are coming around to the realization that SS taxes are just like regular taxes, and that 33-to-35 notion (quietly) acknowledges that fact.
Want to save SS? Means-test benefits. Old folks are among the richest among us. Rich old shitpokes in Sun City shouldn't get a dime of SS or Medicare, but they do. In fact, they have to. You can't not get Medicare. My parents are very well off. They're on Medicare now. They don't have an option.
That is incredibly stupid, and that's why SS is in the situation it's in.
(I find it funny that the same group of people who think there's "no crisis", when there is ample evidence to prove otherwise, are the same folks who think there is a "global warming crisis", and want to take all kinds of economy-wrecking measures to defend against what could charitably described as "sub-optimal science", or "bunk" if you're not terribly PC.)
Actually, he looks pretty good. Looks a little bit like Toby Maguire in '80s stuffed-shirt attire.
Microsoft was a huge Mac developer back in the day. Microsoft Word became what it is because of its success on the Mac.
Anyway, after some time with the various GUI-fied config files, I'm sick to fucking death of them, because I (naturally, I suppose) assumed it would work out as well as a Mac. It never occurred to me that the nerds who would be doing the GUI-fication would be the kinds of nerds who received their GUI education largely by looking at Windows. Thus, they all simply slapped a smiley-face onto a dotfile, with the result being horrific user interaction combined with the added joy of a poorly-programmed script failing to actually update the dotfile (or worse, silently corrupting it into a non-functioning state).
Now, I prefer to edit config files directly. Partially because it is easier and more convenient for me to SSH into various machines to make these changes, but mostly because I am now very familiar with them due to my previous poor experiences with GUI-fied tools forcing me to learn the syntax of the various dotfiles.
Oh, and I hate the way some play-pretty tools simply add on to the end of a config file, since the program will only care about the last set value. /stand/sysinstall does this to FreeBSD's /etc/rc.conf. It means you have to look through the entire file to make sure your config change isn't getting overwritten three screensful down (or exaccerbate the problem by appending your changes to the end all willy-nilly yourself).
The funniest thing about this raging shitfest? He's got a lower UID than you do.
The FX5200 is supported, but is the 5200Go flavor supported? That I don't know. Nothing's keeping Apple from expanding Core Image to support the 9200, and the Mini may be the very thing to shove them into doing so, which will make a lot of iBook users happy.
Most Humorously Appropriate Usage of the Word "Festoon" In A Slashdot Post.
I immediately thought, "this is perfect for corporate needs." With the Xserve hardware, Xsan, their work in adopting and adapting Free software for intrusion detection and security, once you add in an inexpensive client, you've got a (non-partisan) IT department's dream.
Easy to use Unix + cheap hardware? Genius.
If you do go this route, and install Mac OS X Server, you'll be in the unique position of paying more for your server license than for your server hardware!
For most users, 512MB would be plenty. I'm doing fairly intensive Web development (Photoshop, BBEdit, Illustrator, etc.) on a 667mhz G4 with 768MB RAM. Works just fine.
Unless you're employing sarcasm.
Going down that "decent video card" route leads to madness. Want a decent video card? Get a G5. That's what they're there for. The Radeon 9200 isn't a barn-burner, but... so? I just recently upgraded from a GeForce 2 MX, so what do I know. Apple has a good relationship with ATI, and the 9200 is a well-established integrated graphics GPU--a requirement for the Mac Mini, since it is likely that everything is on the system board. It also looks like the Mini doesn't have a fan, so heat is also an issue.
Low-end Macs have low-end graphics. So do low-end PCs. Yes, PCs can be upgraded with an AGP card, but they're not tiny little boxes you can hide behind a photo of your mom.
(Quoted because nobody reads at Threshold < 2 unless they're jobless gits, and thus nobody can see this genius's "contribution".[1]) Because Apple ran usability tests to determine that a symmetrical, one-button mouse is easier to use. They weren't just guessing, you moron. Ask a lefty presented with one of those Microsoft contoured mice if the Apple designers were right or not.
[1] I read it because I clicked on the "3 replies below your threshold" link as I am interested in what people have said in reply to my comment. This footnote is here to forestall the snide riposte "u ReD iT, u MuSt Be A lUsRRR!!!!!1" from some fat asshole nerd, as he returns to fondling his dick through his pants pocket.
No, it used to be the Democratic National Committee, but the election's over now...
All systems are fucked up. Some are fucked up worse than others. The perfect system does not exist and will never exist. Capitalism, or at least the Jesus-laden, love-thy-neighbor version we have in America, is better than most.
Let's also mention military might. The EU spends about $0.35/year on their military budget, and that's why when some asshole in Absurdistan starts massacring people, the EU sends a platoon of potato peelers and the US sends 20 battallions of armed and trained Marines.
The EU socialist-lite system works because it depends on the charity of the American military.
Now, tell me why we should trust your unproven, guesswork economic system? Because it sounds good?