I know it'll go over like a lead balloon, but tax junk food and you'll be 50% of the way towards the beginning of a solution.
Food that has high calorie content and high fat, maybe high sodium, basically shite without any redeeming nutritional value ought to be taxed - a lot.
Manufacturers already spend $ billions / year on advertising, do not let them tell you they can't afford it.
If they say that they'll just pass costs on to consumers, fine, that's the point (plus collecting tax revenues from shite-eaters for their eventual medical needs).
If they say it's social engineering, tell them that social engineering is what they've done with their advertising dollars.
Also wouldn't hurt to tax gasoline more too - get them out of their cars!
Of course, it wouldn't be America anymore if companies weren't encouraged to profit at the expense of society, would it?
Cue for someone to tell me their stories about spontaneously combusing registries that always seem to happen to MS haters.
It's late, but I'll bite: a couple problems I have with my limited use of Office 2003:
1) MS Access cannot *access* Microsoft Foxpro *.dbf files! (In a manner that I've found - works quite easily in the '97 version on same machine.)
Access 2003 does access dBIII files, so using an editor to change the first byte of the file from x03 to x30 (or reverse) makes the file accessable as a dBIII. But forget Foxpro support.
2) Haven't been able to use Access 2003 to connect to mySQL server with ODBC, unlike the simple '97 methond. I'm sure it's do-able, but I can't spend any further time on that project, so it's abandonded 'til whatever.
Just two things I can think of that made me say, "I told you so," when they decided new clients would beat down the doors once we upgraded from '97, since _everyone_ upgraded already.
PS It made my registry spontaneously combuse! M$ suxxors!
Well then, this is a good thing. Maybe SCO should realize that their kernel shouldn't contain an endless while(true) loop-- that explains many problems.
That explains where they keep the truth at SCO methinks.
Do you really think that the US military will allow their ability to put a smart-bomb through an "evil doer's" window to be compromised by a lack of satellites?
What about their ability to bomb wedding parties with smart bombs?
Or allied soldiers doing exercises in Afghanistan?
It has to be pointed out that ``smart'' bombs are not much more accurate than plain old dumb bombs.
Unless you believe the bumpf, in which case the bombs are smart - more so than the guilible.
The government is now claiming a state-secret privilege, and is refusing to let the inventors sue Lucent for patent infringement, citing national security concerns. In the meantime, Lucent continues to directly profit from their invention without paying any royalties or other compensation.
If he can't make his money from Lucent, why not sell it to China or someplace?
Obviously he'd have to leave the United|Excited States of America, but, hey, who needs 'em?
"Unpatched" means there is not a patch available to fix the vulnerability. Yesterday it was unpatched.
True, but calling it "unpatched" when it's also "brand-spanking-new" implies something not being done.
Since when does "unpatched" mean lazy?
It's negative connotation and implies (at least, I inferred) that a bug has been found (true) that is not patched (true), and implication/inference of: for a period of time longer than reasonable to come up with a patch.
BTW, I agree with poster who said it's more like "band-aided" than patched when the patch is turning off a feature.
Slashdot Mirror
Food that has high calorie content and high fat, maybe high sodium, basically shite without any redeeming nutritional value ought to be taxed - a lot.
Manufacturers already spend $ billions / year on advertising, do not let them tell you they can't afford it.
If they say that they'll just pass costs on to consumers, fine, that's the point (plus collecting tax revenues from shite-eaters for their eventual medical needs).
If they say it's social engineering, tell them that social engineering is what they've done with their advertising dollars.
Also wouldn't hurt to tax gasoline more too - get them out of their cars!
Of course, it wouldn't be America anymore if companies weren't encouraged to profit at the expense of society, would it?
I went too the store.
and
I went to the store.
For all intents and purposes, that is the exact same sentance.
Perhaps.
But if coming from someone with English as Second Language, (or heard by such person) they may be trying to say, "I too went to the store."
Not the best example, but hey, it's yours.
I've seen similar situations happen innumerable times. It can make a hell of a difference.
i.e. She says, "Dest". Is that Desk, Dust, um... what am I missing ... what's the context?...
Not a great example, but hey, it's mine.
But if one thinks "Correct speeling is for teh weak", I have to figure one has not much interesting to say.
the belief that those that believe in a creator are wrong is a religious belief
Okay, that's bullshit.
Does that mean I'm religious because I do not believe in the tooth fairy? I don't think so.
Does that mean you're religious because you do believe in a tooth fairy, for which there is not one shred of evidence, in fact, quite the opposite?
Sheesh, what utter nonesense.
I postulate that I can prove there is no god: what divine creator would create so many fuckwits as a legion of devout followers?
Why are fundamentalists unable to use their (supposedly) god-given brains to analyse the nonsense they believe in?
No divine creator would create so many ass hats and set them loose on the rest of us.
It's late, but I'll bite: a couple problems I have with my limited use of Office 2003:
1) MS Access cannot *access* Microsoft Foxpro *.dbf files! (In a manner that I've found - works quite easily in the '97 version on same machine.)
Access 2003 does access dBIII files, so using an editor to change the first byte of the file from x03 to x30 (or reverse) makes the file accessable as a dBIII. But forget Foxpro support.
2) Haven't been able to use Access 2003 to connect to mySQL server with ODBC, unlike the simple '97 methond. I'm sure it's do-able, but I can't spend any further time on that project, so it's abandonded 'til whatever.
Just two things I can think of that made me say, "I told you so," when they decided new clients would beat down the doors once we upgraded from '97, since _everyone_ upgraded already.
PS It made my registry spontaneously combuse! M$ suxxors!
I'm not sure of details, but didn't their purchase of KeyHole effectively get them a satellite?
Well then, this is a good thing. Maybe SCO should realize that their kernel shouldn't contain an endless while(true) loop-- that explains many problems.
That explains where they keep the truth at SCO methinks.
Thanks, Einstein, but 96.94% do require explainin'.
For example, I've downloaded 10 myself - I'm sure many others have too.
There's no way to compare these numbers to the main competition (IE), so I'm not celebrating much myself.
ps First Post!?!
That was before they became one...
What about their ability to bomb wedding parties with smart bombs?
Or allied soldiers doing exercises in Afghanistan?
It has to be pointed out that ``smart'' bombs are not much more accurate than plain old dumb bombs.
Unless you believe the bumpf, in which case the bombs are smart - more so than the guilible.
I guess I can soon update all the AOL coasters that are beginning to wear out?
If he can't make his money from Lucent, why not sell it to China or someplace?
Obviously he'd have to leave the United|Excited States of America, but, hey, who needs 'em?
My 2 cents worth...
Wouldn't pure oxygen help the combustion (theoretically)?
Just wondering if discarding the pure oxygen makes sense? What if it accumulates in a pocket under the hood (bonnet) then sparks via excess heat?
Just thoughts I'm having -- anyone know more about this type of thing?
We all did once [for about 12 months]...
Wow - that is big.
If his device is set to corrupt hundreds of millions of vehicles the world over, will Bill Gates consider him a peer?
That's what came to mind first... now excuse me while I finish TFA.
Who cares about chairs, desks, lighting, etc.?
It just doesn't strike me as office water-cooler conversation.
The other poster's idea of very nice / 3 very nice monitors is a good one, but most of this stuff is not very productivity related.
In other news, anyone know how to test the ignitor in a 1992 Toyota 4Runner, 6-cylinder, 3.0 litre engine, 4x4?
I use it to drive my geeky ass into the back country and it won't start.
WWGD? (What Would a Geek Do?)
Elint my_stuff.doc or whatever...
No? There should be.
True, but calling it "unpatched" when it's also "brand-spanking-new" implies something not being done.
Since when does "unpatched" mean lazy?
It's negative connotation and implies (at least, I inferred) that a bug has been found (true) that is not patched (true), and implication/inference of: for a period of time longer than reasonable to come up with a patch.
BTW, I agree with poster who said it's more like "band-aided" than patched when the patch is turning off a feature.
One time I threw a brick at a duck.
Poor duck!
Did it duck?!?
Thank you - I'm here all week - thank you very much.
That's easy.
They'll suck -- it's what they do.
I seem to recall having to do this before -- anyone else?
I wouldn't be implying laziness on the part of developers until a couple days have passed after the bug report.
Oh! I thought you were going to say, "with the downhill bent that Microsoft has been on".
That would be perhaps more accurate.
Okay - I can't argue that!
Sheesh, just announced yesterday.
Calling it unpatched makes it sound so -- neglected.
If not fixed by monday, then it would be accurrately called Unpatched flaw instead of New flaw
When did you start calling yourself BigBuckHunter instead of the more accurate Dumb Fuck Hunter?