One bloated and mismanaged government is not better than lots of smaller bloated and mismanaged governments. They might all suck, but at least they suck in different ways, giving us choices. Hey, it's kind of like Linux.
What are you, crazy? The Dems are so deep in these peoples pockets that publicly admonishing them would be like kicking your boss in the nuts then asking for a pay raise.
More like kicking your boss in the nuts and saying, "fuck off, I quit", and finding a better company.
I don't get this. I've seen an iPhone. I've seen a TomTom. I don't have either, but I was planning on getting a TomTom standalone, because it can be mounted on the windscreen and has a way bigger screen. Looking down in your lap all the time, taking your eyes off the road, to navigate? Are you shitting? That'd be illegal in the UK. How the heck can you use your weeny little phone for navigation? If they made the screen big enough, it wouldn't come close to fitting in your pocket.
Only in America. Seriously, that's virtually unheard of over here in the UK and is rather comical. What do parents put on for kids to watch during the trip? An in-drive movie?
In one sentence you say it's a good idea to give a massive bailout to GM and Chrysler. In the next you say there's unlikely to be able to compete. Make your mind up. What's the point in leaving semi-skilled employees in the employ of GM and Chrysler if they're imminently doomed?
Also, can we please stop whining about this in relation to the HTML5 spec? HTML has never specified file formats for media/objects (, ) and it should *not* start now.
Why not? 'Tradition' isn't exactly a great justification. A standard should describe some useful stuff that developers can use to implement content. Why have a 'div' tag? Just take it out of the spec and let browser vendors decide how they want to implement that. See the problem? Whether or not dicks like Apple refuse to support a useful base-level codec like Theora, I believe firmly that it's time it was put into the spec.
Does it? Have you actually seen the HTML5 draft spec? There's a lot of new stuff there even with all the constraints - <canvas> is a good example of one very powerful new feature; and there are plenty more.
Is that the one that Microsoft aren't implementing?
Someone would dupe a nuclear bomb. Or at least a bunker buster. And tanks. And AK47s. I predict that very shortly after replicator technology is invented, the human race will be destroyed.
It would qualify as speech, because the actors would be expressing themselves in a nonviolent way. Part of raping a child also probably qualifies as speech, but obviously there's the rather important fact that a large part of it also qualifies as causing all sorts of harm to the child, which is the illegal part.
I saw the documentary "Deep Throat" some time ago, and it said that there were still laws against porn in the US - I couldn't believe it, but it seems to be true.
But wait. I thought the idea was that if the laws were unconstitutional and passed by the federal government, *they didn't apply* and your defense would simply be that the law was unconstitutional and therefore you've broken no law that applied. Any anti-porn law would seem to violate amendment 1. Could someone tell me how those laws being existance (because of boneheaded prudes) changes things?
My point is that everyone cherrypicks. Unrestrained freedom of speech would permit murder and child rape. The founding fathers obviously did not intend this meaning, despite writing that the freedom of speech shall not be infringed.
No, unrestrained freedom of speech would permit MATERIAL THAT DEPICTED these acts being distributed. I say that's fair enough. Thing is, THE ACTS THEMSELVES would still be illegal. Do you really have such a hard time distinguishing a piece of video and an actual raping of a child?
Slashdot Mirror
One bloated and mismanaged government is not better than lots of smaller bloated and mismanaged governments. They might all suck, but at least they suck in different ways, giving us choices. Hey, it's kind of like Linux.
So where on Earth are Windows and MacOSX?
What are you, crazy? The Dems are so deep in these peoples pockets that publicly admonishing them would be like kicking your boss in the nuts then asking for a pay raise.
More like kicking your boss in the nuts and saying, "fuck off, I quit", and finding a better company.
never ever talk to a police officer, nothing good will come out of it.
Why don't you Americans DO something about this obviously far-from-ideal situation??
Maybe she looks flat in real life, too!
Thanks, I'll be here all day.
Hey, lay off the guy. He's allwrite.
At the time an ADSL line was too expensive for most people so this way we could all share one and split the cost (£3 per month).
An ADSL line costing £3/mo was too expensive? When was this, like 1700?
He's just pissy about her because she was pissed during pregnancy.
If you think companies don't diversify, you are horribly mistaken.
Do you think that Kraft foods only makes cheese for example?
I didn't know that Kraft foods EVEN made cheese.
Two chromasomes fusing would reduce the number by 1. How is it that we have 2 fewer?
Neither Google nor Acronym Finder has ANYTHING called "American Association of Concerned Scientists". Sounds like you got the name wrong.
Too bad we probably have to see the patents invalidated one by one, rather than getting the entire class thrown out in one swell foop.
That would indeed be one cunning stunt of a swell foop.
I don't get this. I've seen an iPhone. I've seen a TomTom. I don't have either, but I was planning on getting a TomTom standalone, because it can be mounted on the windscreen and has a way bigger screen. Looking down in your lap all the time, taking your eyes off the road, to navigate? Are you shitting? That'd be illegal in the UK. How the heck can you use your weeny little phone for navigation? If they made the screen big enough, it wouldn't come close to fitting in your pocket.
So vote on, I did I have a standalone unit that I use on my motorcycle all the time.
What happens when it rains?
And feet, for height. :-( We're retarded.
Only in America. Seriously, that's virtually unheard of over here in the UK and is rather comical. What do parents put on for kids to watch during the trip? An in-drive movie?
Sod Tetris, I'm bored with that. Does he have a computer he can play World of Warcraft on, and be something more interesting than a smith?
In one sentence you say it's a good idea to give a massive bailout to GM and Chrysler. In the next you say there's unlikely to be able to compete. Make your mind up. What's the point in leaving semi-skilled employees in the employ of GM and Chrysler if they're imminently doomed?
Also, can we please stop whining about this in relation to the HTML5 spec? HTML has never specified file formats for media/objects (, ) and it should *not* start now.
Why not? 'Tradition' isn't exactly a great justification. A standard should describe some useful stuff that developers can use to implement content. Why have a 'div' tag? Just take it out of the spec and let browser vendors decide how they want to implement that. See the problem? Whether or not dicks like Apple refuse to support a useful base-level codec like Theora, I believe firmly that it's time it was put into the spec.
Does it? Have you actually seen the HTML5 draft spec? There's a lot of new stuff there even with all the constraints - <canvas> is a good example of one very powerful new feature; and there are plenty more.
Is that the one that Microsoft aren't implementing?
Someone would dupe a nuclear bomb. Or at least a bunker buster. And tanks. And AK47s. I predict that very shortly after replicator technology is invented, the human race will be destroyed.
It would qualify as speech, because the actors would be expressing themselves in a nonviolent way. Part of raping a child also probably qualifies as speech, but obviously there's the rather important fact that a large part of it also qualifies as causing all sorts of harm to the child, which is the illegal part.
I saw the documentary "Deep Throat" some time ago, and it said that there were still laws against porn in the US - I couldn't believe it, but it seems to be true.
But wait. I thought the idea was that if the laws were unconstitutional and passed by the federal government, *they didn't apply* and your defense would simply be that the law was unconstitutional and therefore you've broken no law that applied. Any anti-porn law would seem to violate amendment 1. Could someone tell me how those laws being existance (because of boneheaded prudes) changes things?
My point is that everyone cherrypicks. Unrestrained freedom of speech would permit murder and child rape. The founding fathers obviously did not intend this meaning, despite writing that the freedom of speech shall not be infringed.
No, unrestrained freedom of speech would permit MATERIAL THAT DEPICTED these acts being distributed. I say that's fair enough. Thing is, THE ACTS THEMSELVES would still be illegal. Do you really have such a hard time distinguishing a piece of video and an actual raping of a child?
Nobody would care about MS having a monopoly if they actually made the best software.
Speak for yourself.
Send him a letter, or give him a call, let him know your thoughts. Please, be polite.
When was the last time that worked? In any English-speaking country?