I was thinking of picking up a macbook for work, but one of the issues I've run across is they just don't have docking stations. To me this is a bit of a let down for a business environment. Any thoughts?
Anyway, Duh-bya is the chief representative of your party. If you don't like him, remove him from that position. You are in that whiskey barrel by choice.
This article isn't saying what you think it is saying. They are saying that poor George and the poor Republicans (hi pudge) can't read all that well. All those scientific words just confuse them. The new exhibit tries to simplify things, preferably in terms of pet goats.
The Military Commissions Act properly handles terrorism against the United States as a military and national security issue, not a domestic civil or criminal matter (to treat it as such is ridiculous).
Why is terrorism any different to any other crime?
ummmm....wrong again. Starbucks has -never- offered flavored coffee. It's absolutely optional to put in "flavored syrups" to any drink one so chooses - just like millions of dinky little coffee shops do as well.
Sorry, to clarify what I mean. By flavoured coffee I mean what the consumer gets at the counter, not what goes into the espresso maker. Another big chain (in this country) offers flavoured coffee grounds and beans in this country. And yes I dislike all the other little dinky shops who offer it as well, largely because they are ruining the coffee.
Not trying to flame you, either, but most people think Starbucks as being "too strong", and offering predominantly richer roasts.
Once again I think this might be in comparison to the coffee offered in the US. I can assure you that in this country (Australia) compared to the coffee offered by a standard cafe, starbucks coffee is thin. I'm not an expert but my understanding is that Starbucks over-roasts their beans.
Have you tried any of the coffees I linked to? Pre-ground coffee is fine. Try making some in a plunger (french press to USians). For one cup you should probably have about a table of coffee grounds.
You have no idea of the level of preparation. I have a friend who works for the fire brigade here (who handles chemical spills, biological warfare stuff etc) and that amount of people these visits require and the amount of stuff they bring is unbelievable.
It is worth noting that cell phones have been used in assassination attempts. See for example this.
I think this is actually not a terrible bad idea. A bit heavy handed. If you want to get a remote triggering device up fast a mobile phone makes a pretty easy option.
I'm sorry that was a bit snarky, particularly as this is about what people prefer.
The problem with Starbucks is the beans. They use a very thin tasting coffee. I prefer a much richer blend. I think that the best way to describe Starbucks coffee is inoffensive. People who really like coffee might not like it but nobody is going to find it unpleasant to drink.
Sure I've paid for worse coffee than you can get at Starbucks, but Starbucks makes consistently boring coffee. I also dislike the that they offer flavoured coffees, I'm a bit of a purist.
It may also be a comparison thing. I think we do pretty well for coffee in Australia. My sister spent a few weeks in the US and said she only found 2 decent coffees: New York and San Francisco. I've heard similar anecdotal evidence from other people. I've heard there is a preference to boil/drip-percolate the coffee in the US, and in that case Starbucks is definitely better.
In caller-pays, the person who is paying for the service has no market power. If they do not like being charged 25 cents a minute for the call, there's nothing they can do about it, because it's someone else's subscription. There is no price competition for call termination, and consequently rates are as high as regulators will allow.
WTF? In a caller pays situation the caller has market power because if the call is too expensive they can swicth provider. They can do something about it because it is their subscription.
Unfortunately many countries, including Australia (though I understand Austel is looking into remedying this) are stuck on an anti-consumer caller-pays model...
What? A model where the person performing the action pays for it. I call that logical and consider the US system anti-competitive.
I don't think that is quite accurate. It has been shown again and again that ID has been used as a means of shoehorning creationism into the classroom.
The military is partially responsible for the outcomes due to the way they have carried out their mission. I don't think the US trains their soldiers to deal with people from other cultures and religions all that well.
That reminds me of the joke about the farmer who won the lottery. He was being interviewed about the win and was asked what he was going to do this year.
"I'm going to farm"
and next year?
"I'm going to farm"
so you are just going to farm?
"Yep. Until the money runs out"
This used to be a joke with a bit of a hard edge to it, but now it isn't that much of a joke in Australia.
Yeah, I have no reason to download linux ISOs for the linux servers I admin while I am at work. Or send files to another person at work in a work conversation over IM.
I can tell you that Germany was not a democracy when it invaded France in WWII (and it invaded Poland first but anyway). Hitler was ruling under the emergency provisions. The last thing approaching an election was in 1934 where there was a vote of confidence in Hitler. There was considerable intimidation and the final vote was 84.6% in favour. (From memory I thought the vote was in 1936, with a 90% approval rating).
IIRC Argentina was a military dictatorship. Wikipedia seems to agree.
In 1994 I think Haiti had a US installed dictator, I don't know about 1915.
There is a certain irony that the US claims to be a champion of democracy. It is all the more ironic when it has toppled more democracies than any other country. Just look at the history of Central America.
John Howard got back in on a scare campaign based on interest rates. There is a high level of debt in Australia, particularly for people who own property. If interest rates rise you would see a lot of people unable to service that debt. Howard ran a campaign saying under Labor (the other party) the rates would rise.
It is also the only democracy to invade another democracy (Domincan Republic). And don't give me that rubbish about being a republic.
Re:Goddamn lawyers have taken over
on
Google's Evil NDA
·
· Score: 2
Lawyers are only as good as the brief. Garbage in Garbage out.
Re:Things like this are easy to fix.
on
Google's Evil NDA
·
· Score: 1
Part of the problem is that these agreements are written by lawyers, sometimes lawyers without a brief and there is nothing more dangerous than a lawyer without a brief. By nature most lawyers are adversatorial. They act on behalf of their client and push as hard as possible for their client. If you are signing the ND, you aren't their client.
In addition there can be a disconnect between what HR/whatever wants and what the lawyer drafts (no brief or bad brief). In some cases HR/whatever will take whatever the lawyers says as etched in stone. In other cases they have a little more sense.
Slashdot Mirror
OT but...
I was thinking of picking up a macbook for work, but one of the issues I've run across is they just don't have docking stations. To me this is a bit of a let down for a business environment. Any thoughts?
I was joking.
Anyway, Duh-bya is the chief representative of your party. If you don't like him, remove him from that position. You are in that whiskey barrel by choice.
This article isn't saying what you think it is saying. They are saying that poor George and the poor Republicans (hi pudge) can't read all that well. All those scientific words just confuse them. The new exhibit tries to simplify things, preferably in terms of pet goats.
Why is terrorism any different to any other crime?
Correction, the last sentence should read:
For one cup you should probably have about a table spoon of coffee grounds.
Sorry, to clarify what I mean. By flavoured coffee I mean what the consumer gets at the counter, not what goes into the espresso maker. Another big chain (in this country) offers flavoured coffee grounds and beans in this country. And yes I dislike all the other little dinky shops who offer it as well, largely because they are ruining the coffee.
Once again I think this might be in comparison to the coffee offered in the US. I can assure you that in this country (Australia) compared to the coffee offered by a standard cafe, starbucks coffee is thin. I'm not an expert but my understanding is that Starbucks over-roasts their beans.
Have you tried any of the coffees I linked to? Pre-ground coffee is fine. Try making some in a plunger (french press to USians). For one cup you should probably have about a table of coffee grounds.
one.
You have no idea of the level of preparation. I have a friend who works for the fire brigade here (who handles chemical spills, biological warfare stuff etc) and that amount of people these visits require and the amount of stuff they bring is unbelievable.
It is worth noting that cell phones have been used in assassination attempts. See for example this.
I think this is actually not a terrible bad idea. A bit heavy handed. If you want to get a remote triggering device up fast a mobile phone makes a pretty easy option.
I'm sorry that was a bit snarky, particularly as this is about what people prefer.
The problem with Starbucks is the beans. They use a very thin tasting coffee. I prefer a much richer blend. I think that the best way to describe Starbucks coffee is inoffensive. People who really like coffee might not like it but nobody is going to find it unpleasant to drink.
Sure I've paid for worse coffee than you can get at Starbucks, but Starbucks makes consistently boring coffee. I also dislike the that they offer flavoured coffees, I'm a bit of a purist.
I prefer Grinders, Lavazza, Jamaica Blue Mountain or Vittoria coffees (in that order).
It may also be a comparison thing. I think we do pretty well for coffee in Australia. My sister spent a few weeks in the US and said she only found 2 decent coffees: New York and San Francisco. I've heard similar anecdotal evidence from other people. I've heard there is a preference to boil/drip-percolate the coffee in the US, and in that case Starbucks is definitely better.
You have just invalidated any comments you might make in this topic.
In caller-pays, the person who is paying for the service has no market power. If they do not like being charged 25 cents a minute for the call, there's nothing they can do about it, because it's someone else's subscription. There is no price competition for call termination, and consequently rates are as high as regulators will allow.
WTF? In a caller pays situation the caller has market power because if the call is too expensive they can swicth provider. They can do something about it because it is their subscription.
Unfortunately many countries, including Australia (though I understand Austel is looking into remedying this) are stuck on an anti-consumer caller-pays model ...
What? A model where the person performing the action pays for it. I call that logical and consider the US system anti-competitive.
I don't think that is quite accurate. It has been shown again and again that ID has been used as a means of shoehorning creationism into the classroom.
The military is partially responsible for the outcomes due to the way they have carried out their mission. I don't think the US trains their soldiers to deal with people from other cultures and religions all that well.
I think you would have to make a case for her thinking at all before we could argue that one.
That reminds me of the joke about the farmer who won the lottery. He was being interviewed about the win and was asked what he was going to do this year.
"I'm going to farm"
and next year?
"I'm going to farm"
so you are just going to farm?
"Yep. Until the money runs out"
This used to be a joke with a bit of a hard edge to it, but now it isn't that much of a joke in Australia.
The best mechanic I know is damn smart.
Those two facts may not be correlated.
I get that with an IIS site I run. The thing that ticks me off is that there is no need for this stuff to be grabbed from all the sites in existence.
Microsoft is just filling up people's log files (and in my case my mail accounts, since I get emails about 404 errors) with junk.
How many sites out there actually have that stuff installed anyway?
It does that for every update to IE. That is abuse of monopoly.
Yeah, I have no reason to download linux ISOs for the linux servers I admin while I am at work. Or send files to another person at work in a work conversation over IM.
I can tell you that Germany was not a democracy when it invaded France in WWII (and it invaded Poland first but anyway). Hitler was ruling under the emergency provisions. The last thing approaching an election was in 1934 where there was a vote of confidence in Hitler. There was considerable intimidation and the final vote was 84.6% in favour. (From memory I thought the vote was in 1936, with a 90% approval rating).
IIRC Argentina was a military dictatorship. Wikipedia seems to agree.
In 1994 I think Haiti had a US installed dictator, I don't know about 1915.
There is a certain irony that the US claims to be a champion of democracy. It is all the more ironic when it has toppled more democracies than any other country. Just look at the history of Central America.
John Howard got back in on a scare campaign based on interest rates. There is a high level of debt in Australia, particularly for people who own property. If interest rates rise you would see a lot of people unable to service that debt. Howard ran a campaign saying under Labor (the other party) the rates would rise.
It is also the only democracy to invade another democracy (Domincan Republic). And don't give me that rubbish about being a republic.
Lawyers are only as good as the brief. Garbage in Garbage out.
Part of the problem is that these agreements are written by lawyers, sometimes lawyers without a brief and there is nothing more dangerous than a lawyer without a brief. By nature most lawyers are adversatorial. They act on behalf of their client and push as hard as possible for their client. If you are signing the ND, you aren't their client.
In addition there can be a disconnect between what HR/whatever wants and what the lawyer drafts (no brief or bad brief). In some cases HR/whatever will take whatever the lawyers says as etched in stone. In other cases they have a little more sense.