This only increases the odds of dying while pursuing our occasionally dangerous professions, such as Clement Vallandigham, a lawyer and Ohio politician defending a man on a charge of murder, who accidentally shot himself demonstrating how the victim might have shot himself while in the process of drawing a weapon when standing from a kneeling position.
Back in 1987, computing was still the "super job of the future" being touted as the next big thing to get rich as the turn of the century rolled up (kind of like the stupid "drop out of school and be a social network entrepreneur" going around now). You had plenty of people of both sexes trying to "break in" to it back then, and the dollar signs they were seeing weren't perl scalars.
There's very little mention of invisible sky grandfathers in the under-50 crowd (the belief may still be there, but it's rarely presented as argument for policy).
Very little direct mention as argument for, maybe, yet it still *informs* most of their policy. Those that aren't blatant corporate cock-sucking, at least (and yes, I know, the majority of the policy on "both sides" falls into that latter category).
Pressure and coercion are the same thing, people claiming they're not are just trying to play semantics because they have no other leg to stand on
No, they're not, otherwise a boss telling a slacker "do your job or you're fired" would fall afoul of the law in question, and I don't think even the Granola state is that far gone into ridicule yet.
No, it's illegal in every state. It's also not remotely what happened here.
1. No one was fired. One guy resigned.
2. It had nothing to do with how he voted.
3. The backlash came from his donating financial support to a hate campaign
3. The backlash was in the form of people being pissed off about #3. Voting never entered into it, and not even SCOTUS bullshit redefinition of money as "speech" makes that much of a stretch legitimate.
Even if he was fired, which he was, again, not, it was because he pissed off a fuckton of people who: a) would be working for him, and/or b) need to use what they make in order for the company he would be running to stay in business (google's not going to give them 90% of their budget otherwise).
You wants to be a bigoted scumbag? Fine, that's your right. You want to *vote* like one? Absolutely, it's still how decisions get made in this country (hah).
You want to give public support to a hate group, and not have it held against you when it comes out in the open? Tough shit. Like the libertarians say, "the market has spoken."
Which makes them an interesting foil to the "modern" (and I use that term very loosely) right, with it's core belief set stuck anywhere from 1000 to 600 years ago, depending on whether they're more focused on their invisible sky wizard, or bringing back feudalism (with the starring role in jus primae noctis being your friendly neighborhood corporate entity^H^H^H^H^H^Hperson).
Clowns to the left of us, jokers to the right (or vice versa, if you prefer...)
I believe the definition of coercion has it initiated at a level high enough to be able to apply force or intimidation. I don't think threatened employee defection qualifies.
I guess you know more than those usability experts who said otherwise.
While I'm 100% with you that Windows 8's UI is a steaming pile of stupid, it must be pointed out that this particular appeal to authority is poorly used, especially here.
It was "Usability experts" who came up with the idiotic concept of "unified interfaces," use cases be damned, in the first place. And now everyone who makes an OS now wants us to use our desktop machines like they're friggin' cell phones.
I moved away from them to DNS Exit after finding out that Afraid's default setup was to let anyone create a subdomain on your domain.
DNSExit isn't without their issues, though. If you don't want to use your DNS client, they have an HTTP updater. Unfortuantely, it's unencrypted and you need to put your password in as a "GET" parameter. Ugh!
For instance, Google doesn't just focus on improving their ad revenues, they also focus on improving their end-user experience.
Now if they could just stop hiring those UX twits, so that they might actually be able to improve the end-user experience, instead of just focusing on it and crapping all over it instead.
Considering that he's defending the party of the Magic Invisible Sky Wizard (TM), do you honestly expect him to let that go just because it's utterly false?
Socialism and authoritarianism are different concepts. You can have a non-authoritarian socialistic society (in theory), and a capitalistic fascism (the US after another century of current trends continuing, e.g.)
In practice, every human-run government is going to shift over time toward authoritarianism, regardless of its economic philosophies.
Slashdot Mirror
This only increases the odds of dying while pursuing our occasionally dangerous professions, such as Clement Vallandigham, a lawyer and Ohio politician defending a man on a charge of murder, who accidentally shot himself demonstrating how the victim might have shot himself while in the process of drawing a weapon when standing from a kneeling position.
Yeah, but was he acquitted?
How is that proof? Everyone knows that's just a giant space dragon swallowing the moon.
Back in 1987, computing was still the "super job of the future" being touted as the next big thing to get rich as the turn of the century rolled up (kind of like the stupid "drop out of school and be a social network entrepreneur" going around now). You had plenty of people of both sexes trying to "break in" to it back then, and the dollar signs they were seeing weren't perl scalars.
There's very little mention of invisible sky grandfathers in the under-50 crowd (the belief may still be there, but it's rarely presented as argument for policy).
Very little direct mention as argument for, maybe, yet it still *informs* most of their policy. Those that aren't blatant corporate cock-sucking, at least (and yes, I know, the majority of the policy on "both sides" falls into that latter category).
Pressure and coercion are the same thing, people claiming they're not are just trying to play semantics because they have no other leg to stand on
No, they're not, otherwise a boss telling a slacker "do your job or you're fired" would fall afoul of the law in question, and I don't think even the Granola state is that far gone into ridicule yet.
No, it's illegal in every state. It's also not remotely what happened here.
1. No one was fired. One guy resigned.
2. It had nothing to do with how he voted.
3. The backlash came from his donating financial support to a hate campaign
3. The backlash was in the form of people being pissed off about #3. Voting never entered into it, and not even SCOTUS bullshit redefinition of money as "speech" makes that much of a stretch legitimate.
Even if he was fired, which he was, again, not, it was because he pissed off a fuckton of people who: a) would be working for him, and/or b) need to use what they make in order for the company he would be running to stay in business (google's not going to give them 90% of their budget otherwise).
You wants to be a bigoted scumbag? Fine, that's your right. You want to *vote* like one? Absolutely, it's still how decisions get made in this country (hah).
You want to give public support to a hate group, and not have it held against you when it comes out in the open? Tough shit. Like the libertarians say, "the market has spoken."
Which makes them an interesting foil to the "modern" (and I use that term very loosely) right, with it's core belief set stuck anywhere from 1000 to 600 years ago, depending on whether they're more focused on their invisible sky wizard, or bringing back feudalism (with the starring role in jus primae noctis being your friendly neighborhood corporate entity^H^H^H^H^H^Hperson).
Clowns to the left of us, jokers to the right (or vice versa, if you prefer...)
I believe the definition of coercion has it initiated at a level high enough to be able to apply force or intimidation. I don't think threatened employee defection qualifies.
That stopped being true the minute a church made it policy not to marry a couple without a valid government marriage license.
I guess you know more than those usability experts who said otherwise.
While I'm 100% with you that Windows 8's UI is a steaming pile of stupid, it must be pointed out that this particular appeal to authority is poorly used, especially here.
It was "Usability experts" who came up with the idiotic concept of "unified interfaces," use cases be damned, in the first place. And now everyone who makes an OS now wants us to use our desktop machines like they're friggin' cell phones.
Is there anything you DIDN'T get utterly wrong?
Here you go. Wipe the froth off your lips and have a read.
...nothing but empty space between the walls.
For some reason I read that as "empty space between the ears." I guess it's all this talk about politicians and the NSA fapping.
I moved away from them to DNS Exit after finding out that Afraid's default setup was to let anyone create a subdomain on your domain.
DNSExit isn't without their issues, though. If you don't want to use your DNS client, they have an HTTP updater. Unfortuantely, it's unencrypted and you need to put your password in as a "GET" parameter. Ugh!
OpenEMR
When they're not entering into eeeeebil same-sex relationships with their deceptively mousey ninja-housemaid hybrids...
Of course, whether or not folks in those areas are speaking English is debatable.
Round these parts, we talk "Merican", boy. An doncher ferget it.
For instance, Google doesn't just focus on improving their ad revenues, they also focus on improving their end-user experience.
Now if they could just stop hiring those UX twits, so that they might actually be able to improve the end-user experience, instead of just focusing on it and crapping all over it instead.
"Obsolete" doesn't mean "unusable", "unsupported," or even, necessarily, "deprecated."
You're not taking into account that this is slashdot, and there's a news-time-dilation effect in play. Even SoylentNews had this story yesterday.
In the absence of gravity, isn't the equilibrium shape of any bag of mostly water spherical?
That's assuming that girth increases to match length, instead of vice versa. That could be very, very bad.
But, the chances of grouping 12 imbeciles from a random selection is very improbable.
In this country?
Considering that he's defending the party of the Magic Invisible Sky Wizard (TM), do you honestly expect him to let that go just because it's utterly false?
Why would a government want to brick your phone? It's more valuable to them if you keep on using it and they can listen in.
That only holds true if the members of those governments are evil, but completely logical and unemotional androids.
It's a far different scene when in the hands of a government that renames the side dish in the canteen to "Freedom Fries" because that'll show 'em!
Socialism and authoritarianism are different concepts. You can have a non-authoritarian socialistic society (in theory), and a capitalistic fascism (the US after another century of current trends continuing, e.g.)
In practice, every human-run government is going to shift over time toward authoritarianism, regardless of its economic philosophies.