In the end, the internet presents the nightmare of true value comparison;
If I'm shopping for a product for which I don't already have a vendor preference, I won't even think of buying from a vendor who lists products on their webpage, but NOT THE PRICES!
What's the bloody point? It isn't that you have the product that's important, it's how much are you selling it for that I care about! If your company won't list prices, there are plenty of others that will, and one of them will get my business instead of you. I don't have the time or the interest to call up your sales department, wait on hold for half an hour, then spend half a day talking to clueless sales weasels.
Heavily progressive income tax. Heavily progressive inheritence tax. Tax penalties for reincorporating in another country to avoid the absurd tax burdens imposed by our government. Federal Banks. The Federal Reserve. Federal Communications Commission. The Hoover Dam, the Glen Canyon Dam, and the Tenneessee Valley Authority. Public education. Child labor laws.
All of these are direct plays from the Communist Manifesto. And they only just scratch the surface. End of slavery? Civil rights legislation? Affirmative action? 40-hour work weeks? $15 billion to fight AIDS in Africa? Medicare? Medicaid? Perscription Drug program? Social Security? etc. etc. ETC!!
In fact, the only issue that really distinguishes the two parties is abortion. And even on that there are some people in each party who disagree with their party's line on it.
Otherwise both parties are just different degrees of leftism. There is no more right wing when it comes to political parties. There are some individuals who are right wing, but none of the extant parties in the USA are right wing.
Pyramid? Why on earth (heh - pun intended:-) would anybody make that assumption when right here on earth we see pieces of particularly erosion resistant rock that stick up in a way that, if covered with dust and viewed from a satellite could very well look similar to this picture.
I remember when Battlecruiser 3000 was the vaporware champion.
Original Release Date: April 1993 Actual Release Date: October 1996
And that '96 release date was only because the publisher forced the matter, even though Smart thought it wasn't yet ready for publication.
And bear in mind that the original release date in 1993 meant it was already being worked on MUCH earlier. In fact, it had been in development for 7 years by the time it was pushed onto the shelves in '96. I mean,
And for all that, it probably should have stayed as vaporware:-p
I mean, how long has Duke Nukem been in development anyways? More then 7 years? Or is BC3K still king?
But what if global warming is caused by an increase in the amount of radiation emitted by the sun?
Ain't nothing gonna stop that:-p
The number of variables that effect our planetary climate are so vast and varied and interconnected and probably more then a few are still unknown, it seems quite arrogant to think we know how to solve the problem.
And is it really a problem anyways, since we know the earth in the past has been MUCH hotter then it is today...
More so what I am thinking of is, when will these working countries wakeup to any sort of realization that they are in fact working for "superiors" and will want to declare their indendence, if you will. USians did it. Why couldn't others? History has repeated itself before, why couldn't it happen again?
Because the USA was in a unique position of having all the resources it needed, being politically and socially stable, and not having more powerful countries meddle in its internal affairs.
The same cannot be said of most third world countries today.
Ok, so if the UN passed a resolution banning ownership of firearms, since the 2nd amendment hasn't been incorporated under the 14th, the states would be obligated to ban firearms in compliance with this UN resolution.
This isn't as stupid as it may seem - global firearms bans is one of the things that actually has been brought up at the UN.
The thing is, our founders really really really disliked the idea of "entangling alliances" and wanted to generally discourage future law makers from signing on to treaties. The UN is a treaty, and any of a number of bad things could result if we aren't careful. That's why more then a few people want out of the UN.
The US Constitution overrules any US law and treaties. In practice, a treaty is considered on an equal footing with US law, so if a new treaty contradicts existing law, the law is considered overruled, and if new law contradicts an existing treaty, the treaty is considered overruled.
Have there been Supreme Court rulings stating this? Without a supreme court ruling, it is unclear.
Beyond that, I don't think the US has entered into any treaty that says we must do whatever the UN says we must do.
The UN does not dictate to the United States because we are a sovereign country. It would unconstitutional for President Bush to allow the UN to dictate to USA.
As much as I dislike the UN, sadly you are wrong:-(
Article VI of the US Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Shocking as it may be, the US Constitution protects only US citizens and legal residents. What happens to others is a matter of foreign policy goals and international agreements, which may or may not coincide with the consitution, but are certainly not required to.
I remember back when I was using Netscape 3, I just simply removed write access to the cookie file. Netscape didn't complain about it and websites didn't complain about it and everything ran as it should. I only had one site that didn't work as a result.
But then, I NEVER let a website "remember" a password or the like for me, so it mostly kept just the evil cookies at bay.
I haven't tried that recently though, but cookie use is much more sophisticated then it was 5 years ago, so it probably just make web browsing painful these days. Blah.
Calling it "tax cuts for the rich" is bogus anyways. As it is, the bottom 50% of income earners only pay 4% of the income tax collected, so it's not like there is much there to give back to them!
The top 1% earn 20.8% of the income and pay 37.4% of the taxes. Giving them back 1 or 2% is hardly cataclysmic. They already pay proportionally FAR more as it is.
You can't give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay taxes. The people who will benefit the most from a tax cut are those who pay the most in taxes. Duh.
To be in the top 1% of income earners, BTW, takes "only" $293K a year (as of 2001, anyways). A lot of traditionally left-wing people often make that much - athletes, actors, lawyers, doctors. Not to mention that succesful small business owners will frequently make at least that much as well - even a small restaurant can top $350K a year if their restaurant is reasonably popular.
In terms of politicians, according to Forbes, 6 of the 10 richest politicians in the US are... democrats! Only 3 are republicans. Gee, who's the party of the evil, hated rich? http://www.forbes.com/2002/10/29/cx_dd_richpols.ht ml
The Federal Reserve is not accountable to the President, so even if the Fed is able to affect unemployment, that says nothing about Bush.
In fact, the Fed isn't even really accountable to Congress either - it's an independent entity. Congress can't even hold it hostage to funding, since it isn't funded by the government either.
I mean, there *IS* congressional oversight of the Fed, but it mostly just runs itself without interference.
It seems to me to be a no-brainer.. where is the liability in assuming that this is a serious issue that warrants more attention?
The liability, such as it is, is the financial cost to industry of being "cleaner". While the cost may seem comparatively inconsequential in the big scheme of things, the problem is convincing the stockholders/board of directors of that:-p
Who's gonna fund the "clean-ness" campaign? The UN? The IMF? The World Bank? Almost all of it would end up coming out of the US's pocket book in the end, no matter how indirectly. Getting American companies to pay for African/Asian/South American/wherever businesses to clean up their act because maybe it might be harming the earth... ??? Not in our lifetimes!
I was just yesterday reading a book on world mythology and was specifically reading the Aztec section (a Mexican co-worker piqued my interest on the topic...). The Aztecs absolutely rejected Jesus and refused to add him to their pantheon even as a minor figure (which is pathetically amusing considering how huge their pantheon is and how often they integrated gods of other tribes...). There is some reason to suspect that this complete and total rejection of Christianity may have led to their thoroughly brutal treatment at the hands of the Spanish.
But really, when you have hundreds, possibly thousands, of gods in your pantheon, its inevitable that at least one would bear strong similarities to Jesus, or any particular god of any other religion you care to name, for that matter. I wouldn't read anything into it.
But, I didn't claim the hypertext was the web, and I sure as hell didn't claim to be writing web applications EVER, much less in the 70s. Get your attributions right, you insensitive clod:-p
C with a good set of libraries is a gajillion times faster. I find Java to be painfully slow by comparison.
But at the end of the day, it's almost certainly just whatever your most comfortable with. I've done more C/C++ then anything else, so that's what I'm fastest with. You've probably done more Java then anything else, so that's what you're fastest with.
Portability, however, can be quite another matter...
Then again, it depends on what you're developing for. I've never been in a situation where portability was an issue, except between various versions of Windows. And that's doesn't really count:-p
Slashdot Mirror
Sometimes it is better to not apply a patch. At least not without first checking it out first to verify its authenticity :-)
In the end, the internet presents the nightmare of true value comparison;
If I'm shopping for a product for which I don't already have a vendor preference, I won't even think of buying from a vendor who lists products on their webpage, but NOT THE PRICES!
What's the bloody point? It isn't that you have the product that's important, it's how much are you selling it for that I care about! If your company won't list prices, there are plenty of others that will, and one of them will get my business instead of you. I don't have the time or the interest to call up your sales department, wait on hold for half an hour, then spend half a day talking to clueless sales weasels.
Um, no. They're pretty far to the left.
Heavily progressive income tax.
Heavily progressive inheritence tax.
Tax penalties for reincorporating in another country to avoid the absurd tax burdens imposed by our government.
Federal Banks.
The Federal Reserve.
Federal Communications Commission.
The Hoover Dam, the Glen Canyon Dam, and the Tenneessee Valley Authority.
Public education.
Child labor laws.
All of these are direct plays from the Communist Manifesto. And they only just scratch the surface. End of slavery? Civil rights legislation? Affirmative action? 40-hour work weeks? $15 billion to fight AIDS in Africa? Medicare? Medicaid? Perscription Drug program? Social Security? etc. etc. ETC!!
In fact, the only issue that really distinguishes the two parties is abortion. And even on that there are some people in each party who disagree with their party's line on it.
Otherwise both parties are just different degrees of leftism. There is no more right wing when it comes to political parties. There are some individuals who are right wing, but none of the extant parties in the USA are right wing.
Pyramid? Why on earth (heh - pun intended :-) would anybody make that assumption when right here on earth we see pieces of particularly erosion resistant rock that stick up in a way that, if covered with dust and viewed from a satellite could very well look similar to this picture.
First thing that came to my mind: Devil's Tower.
Fortunately, google is your friend :-)
h ievers/erv0-022 t icle-erving.jpg / photo/s_erving_si.jpg - drj002a.jpg h ievers/erv0-000
:-)
http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/photocredit/ac
http://www.mikedust.com/spirits/images/spirits-ar
http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/pg2/2001/0712
http://www.remembertheaba.com/TributeMaterial/360
http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/photocredit/ac
I also didn't know what he looked like until just now
Dr. J vs. Larry Bird on my C64!
w00t!
Battlecruiser 3000
I remember when Battlecruiser 3000 was the vaporware champion.
:-p
Original Release Date: April 1993
Actual Release Date: October 1996
And that '96 release date was only because the publisher forced the matter, even though Smart thought it wasn't yet ready for publication.
And bear in mind that the original release date in 1993 meant it was already being worked on MUCH earlier. In fact, it had been in development for 7 years by the time it was pushed onto the shelves in '96. I mean,
And for all that, it probably should have stayed as vaporware
I mean, how long has Duke Nukem been in development anyways? More then 7 years? Or is BC3K still king?
But what if global warming is caused by an increase in the amount of radiation emitted by the sun?
:-p
s _quote04.html
Ain't nothing gonna stop that
The number of variables that effect our planetary climate are so vast and varied and interconnected and probably more then a few are still unknown, it seems quite arrogant to think we know how to solve the problem.
And is it really a problem anyways, since we know the earth in the past has been MUCH hotter then it is today...
But really, the truth is that aliens cause global warming:
http://www.crichton-official.com/speeches/speeche
The NASA equivalent of "Killroy was here"?
More so what I am thinking of is, when will these working countries wakeup to any sort of realization that they are in fact working for "superiors" and will want to declare their indendence, if you will. USians did it. Why couldn't others? History has repeated itself before, why couldn't it happen again?
Because the USA was in a unique position of having all the resources it needed, being politically and socially stable, and not having more powerful countries meddle in its internal affairs.
The same cannot be said of most third world countries today.
Ok, so if the UN passed a resolution banning ownership of firearms, since the 2nd amendment hasn't been incorporated under the 14th, the states would be obligated to ban firearms in compliance with this UN resolution.
This isn't as stupid as it may seem - global firearms bans is one of the things that actually has been brought up at the UN.
The thing is, our founders really really really disliked the idea of "entangling alliances" and wanted to generally discourage future law makers from signing on to treaties. The UN is a treaty, and any of a number of bad things could result if we aren't careful. That's why more then a few people want out of the UN.
The US Constitution overrules any US law and treaties. In practice, a treaty is considered on an equal footing with US law, so if a new treaty contradicts existing law, the law is considered overruled, and if new law contradicts an existing treaty, the treaty is considered overruled.
Have there been Supreme Court rulings stating this? Without a supreme court ruling, it is unclear.
Beyond that, I don't think the US has entered into any treaty that says we must do whatever the UN says we must do.
The UN is a treaty!
The UN is a treaty.
The UN does not dictate to the United States because we are a sovereign country. It would unconstitutional for President Bush to allow the UN to dictate to USA.
:-(
As much as I dislike the UN, sadly you are wrong
Article VI of the US Constitution:
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Shocking as it may be, the US Constitution protects only US citizens and legal residents. What happens to others is a matter of foreign policy goals and international agreements, which may or may not coincide with the consitution, but are certainly not required to.
I remember back when I was using Netscape 3, I just simply removed write access to the cookie file. Netscape didn't complain about it and websites didn't complain about it and everything ran as it should. I only had one site that didn't work as a result.
But then, I NEVER let a website "remember" a password or the like for me, so it mostly kept just the evil cookies at bay.
I haven't tried that recently though, but cookie use is much more sophisticated then it was 5 years ago, so it probably just make web browsing painful these days.
Blah.
Calling it "tax cuts for the rich" is bogus anyways. As it is, the bottom 50% of income earners only pay 4% of the income tax collected, so it's not like there is much there to give back to them!
t ml
0 0.html t Id=10&passYear=2002&passListType=Person&resultsSta rt=1&resultsHowMany=25&resultsSortProperties=%2Bnu mberfield1%2C%2Bstringfield1&resultsSortCategoryNa me=rank&category1=Country+of+Citizenship&searchPar ameter1=11Str%7C%7CPatCS%7C%7CUnited+States&catego ry2=category&searchParameter2=unset
The top 1% earn 20.8% of the income and pay 37.4% of the taxes. Giving them back 1 or 2% is hardly cataclysmic. They already pay proportionally FAR more as it is.
You can't give a tax cut to someone who doesn't pay taxes. The people who will benefit the most from a tax cut are those who pay the most in taxes.
Duh.
To be in the top 1% of income earners, BTW, takes "only" $293K a year (as of 2001, anyways). A lot of traditionally left-wing people often make that much - athletes, actors, lawyers, doctors. Not to mention that succesful small business owners will frequently make at least that much as well - even a small restaurant can top $350K a year if their restaurant is reasonably popular.
In terms of politicians, according to Forbes, 6 of the 10 richest politicians in the US are... democrats! Only 3 are republicans. Gee, who's the party of the evil, hated rich?
http://www.forbes.com/2002/10/29/cx_dd_richpols.h
Some other good links that either confirm some of the above or just make for good reading:
http://www.irs.gov/taxstats/article/0,,id=102886,
http://taxfoundation.org/SR118.pdf
http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passLis
The Federal Reserve is not accountable to the President, so even if the Fed is able to affect unemployment, that says nothing about Bush.
In fact, the Fed isn't even really accountable to Congress either - it's an independent entity. Congress can't even hold it hostage to funding, since it isn't funded by the government either.
I mean, there *IS* congressional oversight of the Fed, but it mostly just runs itself without interference.
It seems to me to be a no-brainer.. where is the liability in assuming that this is a serious issue that warrants more attention?
:-p
The liability, such as it is, is the financial cost to industry of being "cleaner". While the cost may seem comparatively inconsequential in the big scheme of things, the problem is convincing the stockholders/board of directors of that
Who's gonna fund the "clean-ness" campaign? The UN? The IMF? The World Bank? Almost all of it would end up coming out of the US's pocket book in the end, no matter how indirectly. Getting American companies to pay for African/Asian/South American/wherever businesses to clean up their act because maybe it might be harming the earth... ???
Not in our lifetimes!
I was just yesterday reading a book on world mythology and was specifically reading the Aztec section (a Mexican co-worker piqued my interest on the topic...). The Aztecs absolutely rejected Jesus and refused to add him to their pantheon even as a minor figure (which is pathetically amusing considering how huge their pantheon is and how often they integrated gods of other tribes...). There is some reason to suspect that this complete and total rejection of Christianity may have led to their thoroughly brutal treatment at the hands of the Spanish.
But really, when you have hundreds, possibly thousands, of gods in your pantheon, its inevitable that at least one would bear strong similarities to Jesus, or any particular god of any other religion you care to name, for that matter. I wouldn't read anything into it.
First, I did misread the java thing, so my bad.
:-p
But, I didn't claim the hypertext was the web, and I sure as hell didn't claim to be writing web applications EVER, much less in the 70s. Get your attributions right, you insensitive clod
But Java HAS been around since 1985: http://java.sun.com/features/1998/05/birthday.html
As for the web... well, hypertext at least has been around since the 1960s... *shrug*
http://www.w3.org/History.html
Rapid development?
:-p
*faints*
C with a good set of libraries is a gajillion times faster. I find Java to be painfully slow by comparison.
But at the end of the day, it's almost certainly just whatever your most comfortable with. I've done more C/C++ then anything else, so that's what I'm fastest with. You've probably done more Java then anything else, so that's what you're fastest with.
Portability, however, can be quite another matter...
Then again, it depends on what you're developing for. I've never been in a situation where portability was an issue, except between various versions of Windows. And that's doesn't really count
Which is to say, he'd really need to use a free web-based email that doesn't filter.
I'd recommend angelfire.com, but they aren't offering new accounts...