It's called reality. That's what happened, and that's the Constitutional basis. Calling it revisionist just makes you brainwashed. The fool John McCain can go soak his head, same as a lot of other Republicans who have no idea why they are Republicans. I'm not going to respond to the rest of the dreck drawn into this particular discussion.
You are absolutely correct that Republicans played their part in saddling us with this ghastly act in the first place. I'm no apologist for their stupidity. When their heads are, for once, in the right place, I support it. That's all.
I told you ahead of time if you found some research lab growing stuff it wouldn't impress me. It doesn't change the fact that the USDA is not tasked with producing food, the Department of Labor doesn't produce jobs, the Department of Transportation doesn't transport anybody, the Department of Education doesn't educate anybody, and the Department of Energy doesn't produce any energy.
For god's sake drink some coffee and pay attention. This vote was on the budget, not the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling comes up a little later this month. Then the lefties get to throw another tantrum.
Are you kidding me? Let me summarize the situation:
* The Senate passes a bill to continue federal funding as required * The House passes a bill that also kills Obamacare completely * The Senate rejects it * The House passes a bill that delays Obamacare for a year, kills the medical device tax, and kills women's contraception coverage * The Senate rejects it * The House passes a bill that kills the individual mandate (the only thing that would make Obamacare work) * The Senate rejects it * The government shuts down
Here's the strategy of the Republicans: shut down the government and then threaten to default (this happens on Oct 17th if the debt ceiling isn't raised). The government shutdown is simply a way for the Republicans to show that they are serious. It is an annoyance, but it is not an economic calamity. But the debt ceiling is. If the government defaults, everything is going to hell. So far the Republicans have just shot one hostage. Now they are threatening to kill them all.
Are you a dupe or simply ignorant, coward? You got the sequence wrong. You're playing straight from the leftist playbook and flat out mis-stating what happened and who owns the responsibility for the "shutdown".
Here's what ACTUALLY heppened. Remember, all funding MUST originate in the House. It's in the Constitution.
* The HOUSE passes a bill that funds every single part of the government except the ACA * The Senate (i.e., dictator Harry Reid) rejects it * The House passes a bill that delays the ACA for a year and kills the medical device tax * The Senate (i.e., dictator Harry Reid) rejects it * The House passes a bill that delays the individual mandate for a year, just as it has been delayed for cronies, and pulls the subsidies from Congress, the President, and Presidential appointees, so the Apparatchik are not raised above ordinary citizens in this regard * The Senate (i.e., dictator Harry Reid) rejects it * Certain functions of the government "shut down"; essential functions continue
The simple fact is that the House alone has the power of the purse. The Senate and the President can throw tantrums like infants, and they can interrupt the chain of funding that the House starts, but they cannot change the simple Constitutional fact that the House has the say in funding. They can try to change the House's mind via reasoning, or by brinksmanship. They chose the latter.
I'm not here to ruin your day, but it's not guaranteed that you will wake up tomorrow morning. My guess to an extremely high confidence factor is that they will end up getting back pay, just like they did under Clinton. Funny, though. In real business, the whole point of a furlough is to save money. This is just one more way in which government plays by a different set of rules.
The USDA absolutely is unessential and should be abolished at once. The nation got along fine without a department of agriculture before it was created in 1862 by the Great Despot, and before it was elevated to cabinet status in 1889. The USDA does not grow one stalk of wheat, one ear of corn. (Don't bother finding some obscure lab somewhere growing a few bucks worth for scientific purposes and spending millions to do it; I'm talking about actual production).
The USDA provides food assistance dosmestically. That should obiously be the domain of welfare.
It sends food overseas as aid. That might be appropriate policy if the US ever got back on its feet and dealt with its own poverty and other gross domestic problems and negligences. Certainly it should stop at once and be reconsidered only when that time comes. Then the nation can decide whether this should be the domain of the US government, or charities.
From 2009 to 2011, the budget for USDA inflated by 20%. Funny; in the same period my budget grew by 0%, and the same for most people. Only Federal spending and the wealth of Federal cronies grew during (and since) this period. The budget of $132 billion (estimated, 2011 - god only knows what it is today; nobody else seems to know) should be immediately cut to whatever is really necessary rock bottom for the food safety and inspection program, and the ridiculous cabinet status terminated. My guess is a couple of billion.
And never has. Apple got a Mach *based* kernel working by having complete hardware control and not having to develop drivers for alternative hardware. The Linux, kernel, and BSD kernels that are atually in use on broad sets of kernels, accepted the risk of having the drivers inside the kernel so that they could get them to actually *work*.
And why, pray tell, is developing reliable drivers for a microkernel more difficult than for a monolithic kernel? Logic would dictate entirely the reverse.
Bullshit. It's as free as it gets. It's the definition of free. You can do anything with BSD material, including proprietize derived works. That conflicts with some people's concept of subsuming derivative work and making it as open as the original free bits, but that doesn't allow redefining "free" as "free, and forcing yours to be free, too".
0.5% overhead is fine with you. I am absolutely in agreement with this.
5-10% overhead horrifies you. OK, you're starting to lose me here. 5-10% overhead is canceled out completely by maybe TWO MONTHS of CPU development. It's nothing. Nada.
Anticipation of an implied rise to perhaps 7.5-15% overhead seems to make you reel in dismay. That seems to you to equate to the system grinding to a halt. Funny, in my world it translates to a system which is 85-92.5% as efficient as a theoretical zero-overhead system. I wouldn't welcome it for no reason, but hypothetically if it gave me significantly better reliability and security I would be inclined to accept it quite happily. Such an overhead is completely imperceptible subjectively. You would never notice it was there if you didn't instrument the system and run some benchmarks.
OTOH, lengthy UI latencies of one or more seconds at a time (Windows, I'm talking about you) are extremely noticeable and objectionable. In the previous considerations, I'm assuming that the overhead is not necessarily producing lengthy latencies.
I passed a truck doing 20 under the speed limit up the center lane on its left, and hit the car that had passed both me and the truck on the right when we both pulled back into the middle lane in front of the truck.
I bet the truck driver got a good laugh out of that one, two hotshots colliding with each other.
It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever whether he believes in anything you regard as imaginary or not. What matters is whether he is trying to impress on the curriculum any improper or undue slant. At worst he is an accomplice (not necessarily willing) in a pervasive system of brainwashing and subversion. It is more honest and effective to concentrate on the system.
Please understand, it's not that I necessarily object in principle to bigotry against belief systems that are arguably evil or at least retard civilization. What I object to is unclear process and wrong targeting. The target ought to be a government incorporating exclusive support of a specific religion and targeting those who do not support that religion in violation of elementary human rights.
I tend to believe you would have to do, not only significant engineering, but real physical testing to perfect the yield of the fizzle to just what you want it to be, so you don't end up with either relatively intact fissile material, or too big of a kaboom. Physical testing is a real no-no nowadays. Also, a fizzle by its nature is apt to create a lot of radioactive contamination, which is far from ideal. I do think it is best to just make sure there can't be any nuclear discharge whatsoever unless it is intended.
To this end they did pretty darned good, but arguably the assuredness level should have been even higher. And I rather presume it is, by now.
Just because there isn't enough liquid capital in the world to buy up all of a certain category of goods doesn't mean the aggregate valuation of those goods is too high.
ebno-10db already dismantled our anonymous hero so thoroughly that the latter is now at -1 and you probably didn't bother to read it. All I was doing was applauding ebno-10db (obviously).
That's completely outside the scope of the question posed, but yes, all those are additional points to consider. Was the demilitarization of Japanese culture worth the over 100,000 Japanese lives lost after August 5? That's another good one to consider.
Slashdot Mirror
Brilliant! Compact and telling. Mod up.
It's called reality. That's what happened, and that's the Constitutional basis. Calling it revisionist just makes you brainwashed. The fool John McCain can go soak his head, same as a lot of other Republicans who have no idea why they are Republicans. I'm not going to respond to the rest of the dreck drawn into this particular discussion.
You are absolutely correct that Republicans played their part in saddling us with this ghastly act in the first place. I'm no apologist for their stupidity. When their heads are, for once, in the right place, I support it. That's all.
I told you ahead of time if you found some research lab growing stuff it wouldn't impress me. It doesn't change the fact that the USDA is not tasked with producing food, the Department of Labor doesn't produce jobs, the Department of Transportation doesn't transport anybody, the Department of Education doesn't educate anybody, and the Department of Energy doesn't produce any energy.
For god's sake drink some coffee and pay attention. This vote was on the budget, not the debt ceiling. The debt ceiling comes up a little later this month. Then the lefties get to throw another tantrum.
Are you a dupe or simply ignorant, coward? You got the sequence wrong. You're playing straight from the leftist playbook and flat out mis-stating what happened and who owns the responsibility for the "shutdown".
Here's what ACTUALLY heppened. Remember, all funding MUST originate in the House. It's in the Constitution.
* The HOUSE passes a bill that funds every single part of the government except the ACA
* The Senate (i.e., dictator Harry Reid) rejects it
* The House passes a bill that delays the ACA for a year and kills the medical device tax
* The Senate (i.e., dictator Harry Reid) rejects it
* The House passes a bill that delays the individual mandate for a year, just as it has been delayed for cronies, and pulls the subsidies from Congress, the President, and Presidential appointees, so the Apparatchik are not raised above ordinary citizens in this regard
* The Senate (i.e., dictator Harry Reid) rejects it
* Certain functions of the government "shut down"; essential functions continue
The simple fact is that the House alone has the power of the purse. The Senate and the President can throw tantrums like infants, and they can interrupt the chain of funding that the House starts, but they cannot change the simple Constitutional fact that the House has the say in funding. They can try to change the House's mind via reasoning, or by brinksmanship. They chose the latter.
The Democrats own the shutdown, period.
Get real, anonymous dupe. Social security payments are not interrupted.
That's not to say I wouldn't disband the NSA tomorrow if I had the power.
Real jobs where useful work is done.
I'm not here to ruin your day, but it's not guaranteed that you will wake up tomorrow morning. My guess to an extremely high confidence factor is that they will end up getting back pay, just like they did under Clinton. Funny, though. In real business, the whole point of a furlough is to save money. This is just one more way in which government plays by a different set of rules.
The USDA absolutely is unessential and should be abolished at once. The nation got along fine without a department of agriculture before it was created in 1862 by the Great Despot, and before it was elevated to cabinet status in 1889. The USDA does not grow one stalk of wheat, one ear of corn. (Don't bother finding some obscure lab somewhere growing a few bucks worth for scientific purposes and spending millions to do it; I'm talking about actual production).
The USDA provides food assistance dosmestically. That should obiously be the domain of welfare.
It sends food overseas as aid. That might be appropriate policy if the US ever got back on its feet and dealt with its own poverty and other gross domestic problems and negligences. Certainly it should stop at once and be reconsidered only when that time comes. Then the nation can decide whether this should be the domain of the US government, or charities.
From 2009 to 2011, the budget for USDA inflated by 20%. Funny; in the same period my budget grew by 0%, and the same for most people. Only Federal spending and the wealth of Federal cronies grew during (and since) this period. The budget of $132 billion (estimated, 2011 - god only knows what it is today; nobody else seems to know) should be immediately cut to whatever is really necessary rock bottom for the food safety and inspection program, and the ridiculous cabinet status terminated. My guess is a couple of billion.
And why, pray tell, is developing reliable drivers for a microkernel more difficult than for a monolithic kernel? Logic would dictate entirely the reverse.
And if Mach's architecture entailed a high overhead on a 16 MHz single core 16020, it would be utterly negligible on today's 3 GHz four core CPU.
Bullshit. It's as free as it gets. It's the definition of free. You can do anything with BSD material, including proprietize derived works. That conflicts with some people's concept of subsuming derivative work and making it as open as the original free bits, but that doesn't allow redefining "free" as "free, and forcing yours to be free, too".
It makes glaciation, erosion of canyons, and rise and fall of mountains appear to be blindingly rapid.
Not to mention 0.9.1, 0.9.1.1, 0.9.1.1.1 ...
Let me try to understand this.
0.5% overhead is fine with you. I am absolutely in agreement with this.
5-10% overhead horrifies you. OK, you're starting to lose me here. 5-10% overhead is canceled out completely by maybe TWO MONTHS of CPU development. It's nothing. Nada.
Anticipation of an implied rise to perhaps 7.5-15% overhead seems to make you reel in dismay. That seems to you to equate to the system grinding to a halt. Funny, in my world it translates to a system which is 85-92.5% as efficient as a theoretical zero-overhead system. I wouldn't welcome it for no reason, but hypothetically if it gave me significantly better reliability and security I would be inclined to accept it quite happily. Such an overhead is completely imperceptible subjectively. You would never notice it was there if you didn't instrument the system and run some benchmarks.
OTOH, lengthy UI latencies of one or more seconds at a time (Windows, I'm talking about you) are extremely noticeable and objectionable. In the previous considerations, I'm assuming that the overhead is not necessarily producing lengthy latencies.
I bet the truck driver got a good laugh out of that one, two hotshots colliding with each other.
A goodly number of them ARE police officers.
Back to third grade also for the idiot moderator.
It makes absolutely no difference whatsoever whether he believes in anything you regard as imaginary or not. What matters is whether he is trying to impress on the curriculum any improper or undue slant. At worst he is an accomplice (not necessarily willing) in a pervasive system of brainwashing and subversion. It is more honest and effective to concentrate on the system.
Please understand, it's not that I necessarily object in principle to bigotry against belief systems that are arguably evil or at least retard civilization. What I object to is unclear process and wrong targeting. The target ought to be a government incorporating exclusive support of a specific religion and targeting those who do not support that religion in violation of elementary human rights.
Back to third grade for you my anonymous one, to restudy beginning math and beginning logic. Either that, or turn in your sarcasm ring.
Turn in your Austin Powers ring. It's more like the "meeeeeeellionth poster".
I tend to believe you would have to do, not only significant engineering, but real physical testing to perfect the yield of the fizzle to just what you want it to be, so you don't end up with either relatively intact fissile material, or too big of a kaboom. Physical testing is a real no-no nowadays. Also, a fizzle by its nature is apt to create a lot of radioactive contamination, which is far from ideal. I do think it is best to just make sure there can't be any nuclear discharge whatsoever unless it is intended.
To this end they did pretty darned good, but arguably the assuredness level should have been even higher. And I rather presume it is, by now.
Just because there isn't enough liquid capital in the world to buy up all of a certain category of goods doesn't mean the aggregate valuation of those goods is too high.
ebno-10db already dismantled our anonymous hero so thoroughly that the latter is now at -1 and you probably didn't bother to read it. All I was doing was applauding ebno-10db (obviously).
That's completely outside the scope of the question posed, but yes, all those are additional points to consider. Was the demilitarization of Japanese culture worth the over 100,000 Japanese lives lost after August 5? That's another good one to consider.