I'm responding to this one, but this is really meant for all the others too that responded saying its an experiment, I'm outnumbered, I'm a shitlord, etc:)
The problem is that monitoring will be inherent in the solution...when has any government ever done anything like this with no strings attached? With no intrusion into your life? Anyone who says 'its an experiment, it doesn't have to be that way in reality' is living in a fantasy world. Of course it would have to be that way, just like the purest ideas of whatever ideology you or I subscribe to can never be implemented in the ideologist's conceived way. In what existence does any of us live in where the powers that be would not want to have those kinds of strings attached? How else do you expect the distribution of wealth and future decision making can be made regarding these kinds of programs? I for one do not want to be any kind of a social experiment. Social experiments should not happen.
You know, some people like to call the idea / creation of the United States the "great social experiment". Bullshit. Stop experimenting with freedom. Freedom is not an experiment, all these so called 'social experiments' are thinly veiled attempts to figure out how you can take someone's freedom away in a way that's acceptable to them.
The money is not unconditional. First, the article does not specifically say they have decided on having no strings attached or not, just that they would prefer it that way. However even that is a lie. Right there in the summary, it says:
"Then, assessors will record life consequences like changes in work patterns, self-employment, artistic endeavors, or idleness".
If they are doing that, the money is not unconditional. You must provide this information or have someone study/watch what you do with your life. Those are conditions. Give me the money and expect nothing in return - that is unconditional. And this ladies and gentlemen is exactly why I don't want to live in a socialist shithole. If the nannystate provides us with our income or some portion of it, they will eventually (or immediately) require us to let them watch and analyze everything and anything we do with our lives. If you take this money, this is what you want for yourself and the rest of society. Period.
No one who takes this money values their freedom. I never want to hear anyone who would even consider taking this money bitch about the NSA, CIA, FBI, TSA, backdoors, cryptography, or neocon wingnuts....because these leftist moonbat experiments will truly destroy the freedom of all humanity.
What is she going to do? Orchestrate a merger between US and Canada, then rebrand everything from the US as Canada, and everything from Canada as US? Then sell off Canada again when she finally realizes it is a disaster?
It was a Catholic priest who first developed the idea that became known as the big bang theory, which Einstein did not accept until he saw Msgr Lemaître present his theory at a conference or something. It is unfortunate that some scientists are so anti religion that they ignore the contributions of the Catholic Church and clergy to many of the ideas that they so rabidly defend as "proof" that there is no God or that religion and science are incompatiable.
Other US industries are backing the legislation. SOPA is intended to block distributors of ALL pirated/counterfeit goods...so clothing manufacturers, for example, like it because they want to be able to block sites selling cheap knockoffs of designer clothing, bags, sneakers, etc.
Most people don't NEED a smartphone. However they WANT a smartphone. Most people also don't know the difference between the two. When enough people have them, the carriers will convince/dictate to you that you NEED a smartphone too. When plain old device service (PODS) is discontinued by the carriers, you will not have a choice but to have a smartphone.
BTW, I claim patent, copyright, and trademark on that acronym. I will sue everyone and Steve Jobs' corpse for 1 Billion dollars if you do not pay my license fee for using that acronym. Even if you are quoting me, you violate the EULA for my acronym.
Come over to sid. It's "unstable" in terms that it changes a lot. Sid is almost ALWAYS newer than Ubuntu. Because every 6 months Ubuntu draws a line in the sand and says "Nope, we're stopping here." Sure you get bug fixes and can go through and find a ppa that backports. As long as that ppa developer doesn't stop. Then you find another PPA. But it has a different naming convention and it's a (@#* nightmare.
I would go to Sid except for exactly what you described...it's called unstable for a reason, one day I will try to update my system and it will break. Only reason Sid works so well as the baseline for Ubuntu is because they take that unstable and manage it as it if was a stable branch, keeping it patched, dependencies working, etc. Running Ubuntu is like having a happy medium between debian stable and unstable.
We do have national and local roads, also state roads and county roads. Each type can get funding from any variety of sources for many reasons. However I think the previous poster is commenting on how a nationally collected tax would provide disproportionate funding to federal infrastructure on a state by state or local level. There might be more online shoppers in areas of higher population and wealth, but that federal internet tax money would be applied to federal projects in areas that may not be contributing to the pot as much...in other words, like every other federal program in existence.
...about porting Linux apps to the Cloud? TFA talks about how OpenOffice/LibreOffice will never make it to the cloud in time to be competitive vs Google Docs/Office Live...but if the Linux/FOSS crowd wants their software to remain open, why would they use such applications in the cloud? Would providing the app via the cloud into a browser be considered "distribution" of the application or binary, and if so would the cloud provider be required to provide their modified source to interested parties? If not, I see no reason why OSS advocates would even want to use such applications in the cloud...and without those who are most feverishly supportive of Open Source, what real market would "Cloud LibreOffice" or "GIMPCloud" have?
That's not true. Congress can not pass any law that would cause freedom of speech to be abridged. That also means any government entity created by a law Congress passes is held to the First Amendment. That also includes funding of other government entities, including state or municipal entities which accept federal funding which happens to violate someone's freedom of speech. My point still stands. I can tell you to be silent, I can tell you I will sue you if you do not silence yourself. It is not a violation of your freedom of speech. There are no legal ramifications to that. If I own a company, and my company tells you that we will sue if you disclose xyz, we would be within our legal right to say that.
What happens in court if you actually disclose xyz and it goes in front of a judge may be another matter, but the threat is not a violation of your freedom of speech.
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The government can not violate your freedom of speech. A private person or organization can do whatever the hell they want.
Ah yes, Arch, the distro that tries to convince its users that it's a BSD (hint: aur is NOT the same as ports), and contributes nothing upstream. Are you guys still throwing everything in/usr/bin?
I would say Arch is trying to be a blend of BSD/Gentoo without all that compiling everything nonsense. Very easy to build/maintain a minimal system, no release cycles, and piece of cake to unofficially distribute your own software packages to the rest of the Arch community. Arch is probably one of the most promising ideas for a distro we have seen in a long time.
At least in the USA, the -re suffix (as used in the Queen's English) is typically replaced with -er...when a typical American English speaker sees -re, it is most likely because the word is not English and intended to be pronounced as "ray", since they are aware that the ending is pronounced that way in foreign languages. Libre certainly is a "foreign word" to us. American English speakers do not look at -re and think that it sounds like "er", unless they know they are reading text that is intentionally written/spelled in the Queen's English. To use your litre example, we would not write it as "litre", it is "liter". However we are certainly aware that it is a non-USA spelling of the word and that it should be pronounced the same as if it were liter.
I don't think typical American English speakers have a problem actually pronouncing the -re ending as "ray", however it is a longer sound, we tend not to have to pronounce it as a suffix that often and it drags the timing of the word out. When we say "LibreOffice" it drags the tempo and rhythm of the speech down in the middle of the name in a very odd way with that combination of vowel sounds. In our normal speech there would be a stop or consonant/plosive sound between those vowel sounds but in this case is intended to be pronounced as one word. Because of that, it feels uncomfortable to pronounce. It's not so much the "Libre" in and of itself...it's the combination of Libre and Office together.
Mod parent up! Science is not about your idea being right. It's about determining if your idea is correct or incorrect through a repeatable, reproducible process utilizing the scientific method. Acquiring grant money is about your idea being right.
I went on a 'ghost hunt' aboard the Queen Mary with a guy that claims to do work similar to what the TAPS team does. He genuinely shocked that only a fraction of the people that came in (including myself *SMUG!!*) brought a flashlight.
Just as a note on this, the TAPS team investigated the Queen Mary, and they determined that someone had tampered with their investigation.
Yeah that came up during our tour there. The guide was very unhappy with the TAPS team. He went the windy route explaining all of it, but he claims one of the unseen SciFi channel filming crew did it.
Realize that the Queen Mary has been seeing hard financial times over the past several years. I have knowledge of this, having heard this from Queen Mary staff when on a tour way before the Queen Mary Ghost Hunters episode. They certainly have the motive to try to pull one over on a group as popular and respected as TAPS. Don't know if you saw the episode in question, but when they confronted the Queen Mary personnel about the bed sheet incident, they looked very uncomfortable with themselves...the body language seemed to indicate guilt if you believe in a such thing as the "tell" of a person's body language.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm responding to this one, but this is really meant for all the others too that responded saying its an experiment, I'm outnumbered, I'm a shitlord, etc :)
The problem is that monitoring will be inherent in the solution...when has any government ever done anything like this with no strings attached? With no intrusion into your life? Anyone who says 'its an experiment, it doesn't have to be that way in reality' is living in a fantasy world. Of course it would have to be that way, just like the purest ideas of whatever ideology you or I subscribe to can never be implemented in the ideologist's conceived way. In what existence does any of us live in where the powers that be would not want to have those kinds of strings attached? How else do you expect the distribution of wealth and future decision making can be made regarding these kinds of programs? I for one do not want to be any kind of a social experiment. Social experiments should not happen.
You know, some people like to call the idea / creation of the United States the "great social experiment". Bullshit. Stop experimenting with freedom. Freedom is not an experiment, all these so called 'social experiments' are thinly veiled attempts to figure out how you can take someone's freedom away in a way that's acceptable to them.
The money is not unconditional. First, the article does not specifically say they have decided on having no strings attached or not, just that they would prefer it that way. However even that is a lie. Right there in the summary, it says:
"Then, assessors will record life consequences like changes in work patterns, self-employment, artistic endeavors, or idleness".
If they are doing that, the money is not unconditional. You must provide this information or have someone study/watch what you do with your life. Those are conditions. Give me the money and expect nothing in return - that is unconditional. And this ladies and gentlemen is exactly why I don't want to live in a socialist shithole. If the nannystate provides us with our income or some portion of it, they will eventually (or immediately) require us to let them watch and analyze everything and anything we do with our lives. If you take this money, this is what you want for yourself and the rest of society. Period.
No one who takes this money values their freedom. I never want to hear anyone who would even consider taking this money bitch about the NSA, CIA, FBI, TSA, backdoors, cryptography, or neocon wingnuts....because these leftist moonbat experiments will truly destroy the freedom of all humanity.
What is she going to do? Orchestrate a merger between US and Canada, then rebrand everything from the US as Canada, and everything from Canada as US? Then sell off Canada again when she finally realizes it is a disaster?
It was a Catholic priest who first developed the idea that became known as the big bang theory, which Einstein did not accept until he saw Msgr Lemaître present his theory at a conference or something. It is unfortunate that some scientists are so anti religion that they ignore the contributions of the Catholic Church and clergy to many of the ideas that they so rabidly defend as "proof" that there is no God or that religion and science are incompatiable.
Europe has not put an end to homelessness. I have seen people sleeping on the streets in London.
um how do the penises mutilate themselves???? forget it I really don't want to know...
Other US industries are backing the legislation. SOPA is intended to block distributors of ALL pirated/counterfeit goods...so clothing manufacturers, for example, like it because they want to be able to block sites selling cheap knockoffs of designer clothing, bags, sneakers, etc.
PS I also own the rights to the acronym Plain Old Only a Phone Service (POOPS). So don't even try it...
Most people don't NEED a smartphone. However they WANT a smartphone. Most people also don't know the difference between the two. When enough people have them, the carriers will convince/dictate to you that you NEED a smartphone too. When plain old device service (PODS) is discontinued by the carriers, you will not have a choice but to have a smartphone.
BTW, I claim patent, copyright, and trademark on that acronym. I will sue everyone and Steve Jobs' corpse for 1 Billion dollars if you do not pay my license fee for using that acronym. Even if you are quoting me, you violate the EULA for my acronym.
Come over to sid. It's "unstable" in terms that it changes a lot. Sid is almost ALWAYS newer than Ubuntu. Because every 6 months Ubuntu draws a line in the sand and says "Nope, we're stopping here." Sure you get bug fixes and can go through and find a ppa that backports. As long as that ppa developer doesn't stop. Then you find another PPA. But it has a different naming convention and it's a (@#* nightmare.
I would go to Sid except for exactly what you described...it's called unstable for a reason, one day I will try to update my system and it will break. Only reason Sid works so well as the baseline for Ubuntu is because they take that unstable and manage it as it if was a stable branch, keeping it patched, dependencies working, etc. Running Ubuntu is like having a happy medium between debian stable and unstable.
We do have national and local roads, also state roads and county roads. Each type can get funding from any variety of sources for many reasons. However I think the previous poster is commenting on how a nationally collected tax would provide disproportionate funding to federal infrastructure on a state by state or local level. There might be more online shoppers in areas of higher population and wealth, but that federal internet tax money would be applied to federal projects in areas that may not be contributing to the pot as much...in other words, like every other federal program in existence.
You don't see people messing with The Iliad
I'll see your Iliad and raise you an "Odyssey"
O Brother, Where Art Thou? - Starring George Clooney
...about porting Linux apps to the Cloud? TFA talks about how OpenOffice/LibreOffice will never make it to the cloud in time to be competitive vs Google Docs/Office Live...but if the Linux/FOSS crowd wants their software to remain open, why would they use such applications in the cloud? Would providing the app via the cloud into a browser be considered "distribution" of the application or binary, and if so would the cloud provider be required to provide their modified source to interested parties? If not, I see no reason why OSS advocates would even want to use such applications in the cloud...and without those who are most feverishly supportive of Open Source, what real market would "Cloud LibreOffice" or "GIMPCloud" have?
ORACLE Unleashes Most Powerful Flare Since 2006. Jeez, editors....
That's not true. Congress can not pass any law that would cause freedom of speech to be abridged. That also means any government entity created by a law Congress passes is held to the First Amendment. That also includes funding of other government entities, including state or municipal entities which accept federal funding which happens to violate someone's freedom of speech. My point still stands. I can tell you to be silent, I can tell you I will sue you if you do not silence yourself. It is not a violation of your freedom of speech. There are no legal ramifications to that. If I own a company, and my company tells you that we will sue if you disclose xyz, we would be within our legal right to say that.
What happens in court if you actually disclose xyz and it goes in front of a judge may be another matter, but the threat is not a violation of your freedom of speech.
Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
The government can not violate your freedom of speech. A private person or organization can do whatever the hell they want.
... then maybe it's time to switch to Fedora?
or Arch.
Ah yes, Arch, the distro that tries to convince its users that it's a BSD (hint: aur is NOT the same as ports), and contributes nothing upstream. Are you guys still throwing everything in /usr/bin?
I would say Arch is trying to be a blend of BSD/Gentoo without all that compiling everything nonsense. Very easy to build/maintain a minimal system, no release cycles, and piece of cake to unofficially distribute your own software packages to the rest of the Arch community. Arch is probably one of the most promising ideas for a distro we have seen in a long time.
No. When you see "centre" you pronounce it "center" and never /SEN-tray/.
Isn't that what I said in the "liter/litre" example?
At least in the USA, the -re suffix (as used in the Queen's English) is typically replaced with -er...when a typical American English speaker sees -re, it is most likely because the word is not English and intended to be pronounced as "ray", since they are aware that the ending is pronounced that way in foreign languages. Libre certainly is a "foreign word" to us. American English speakers do not look at -re and think that it sounds like "er", unless they know they are reading text that is intentionally written/spelled in the Queen's English. To use your litre example, we would not write it as "litre", it is "liter". However we are certainly aware that it is a non-USA spelling of the word and that it should be pronounced the same as if it were liter.
I don't think typical American English speakers have a problem actually pronouncing the -re ending as "ray", however it is a longer sound, we tend not to have to pronounce it as a suffix that often and it drags the timing of the word out. When we say "LibreOffice" it drags the tempo and rhythm of the speech down in the middle of the name in a very odd way with that combination of vowel sounds. In our normal speech there would be a stop or consonant/plosive sound between those vowel sounds but in this case is intended to be pronounced as one word. Because of that, it feels uncomfortable to pronounce. It's not so much the "Libre" in and of itself...it's the combination of Libre and Office together.
Mod parent up! Science is not about your idea being right. It's about determining if your idea is correct or incorrect through a repeatable, reproducible process utilizing the scientific method. Acquiring grant money is about your idea being right.
WOOOOOOOOOOSH!
electrons only had one flavour.
Electrons have a flavor? Is that what I taste when I touch the top of a 9V battery to my tongue?
Computer!
Computer?
(picks up mouse)
Hello, Computer...
Best. Post. Ever.
I went on a 'ghost hunt' aboard the Queen Mary with a guy that claims to do work similar to what the TAPS team does. He genuinely shocked that only a fraction of the people that came in (including myself *SMUG!!*) brought a flashlight.
Just as a note on this, the TAPS team investigated the Queen Mary, and they determined that someone had tampered with their investigation.
Yeah that came up during our tour there. The guide was very unhappy with the TAPS team. He went the windy route explaining all of it, but he claims one of the unseen SciFi channel filming crew did it.
Realize that the Queen Mary has been seeing hard financial times over the past several years. I have knowledge of this, having heard this from Queen Mary staff when on a tour way before the Queen Mary Ghost Hunters episode. They certainly have the motive to try to pull one over on a group as popular and respected as TAPS. Don't know if you saw the episode in question, but when they confronted the Queen Mary personnel about the bed sheet incident, they looked very uncomfortable with themselves...the body language seemed to indicate guilt if you believe in a such thing as the "tell" of a person's body language.