Even then, their power is very limited by the political school boards...
Tell me about it- the public elementary school we attended was below average and needed all kinds of help. So happened that during about a 3-year window a group of -very- active parents were at the school at the same time. We managed to fund after-school activities, playground equipment, and after reaching out to some donors, we actually accumulated enough money to build on an extension to the library- no capital costs at all to the district.
We spoke to officials all through the district before we started beating the bushes for money; each and every one thought it was a great idea. We also asked the donors to talk to high-level contacts in the district to be sure- No problem. We took almost two years to raise the money, but as we were starting to engage the architects to draw plans that the district could approve, we were told to stand down, because it wouldn't be fair to the other elementary schools in the district that didn't have nice libraries. When we went back and spoke to the officials that previously had said it was a good idea, the responses were along the lines of "we didn't think you'd actually do it".
Understand what you're saying, but I actually don't live in too bad of a neighborhood; it's not wealthy, just average / quiet. We're in sort of a corner of the area that's zoned to this school. Bought the house before my son was born, and at the time, the other areas in the zone that feed the school wouldn't be called nice, but they weren't bad, either. Several factors were evaluated that made it worth it to fork over tuition for private school rather than move.
I was with you until your last sentence and then you showed your true colors.
So you lost your argument by showing that you are nothing more then a prat.
The school we’re zoned to is not just tough, it’s dangerous- Most teachers don’t try to teach; if they prevent major crimes from occurring, they've had a good day. The stories that come out of that place are gut-wrenching; the kids there aren't being prepared for squat. I've busted my ass and sacrificed a lot to send my son to a private school as a result.
What little good that could come of us participating in the local public school would pale in comparison to the harm it has the potential of doing to my son- not only to his well being day-to-day, but to his chances of success afterwards as well. I'm not sacrificing my son's future on account of Allison's idealist prattle. From what I've seen, not many of the our local public school system's participants: teachers, parents (especially the parents), or the students give a rat's ass about making their school system any better.
I attended a very tough school while growing up, and learned more about avoiding having my ass kicked than anything else that I needed for college- as a result, it took two tries and 6 years to finish my first degree- my first two years were spent learning what I should have learned in high school.
Allison Benedikt has her opinion of me, and I have my opinion of her. My son is my responsibility until he's grown; if his young life is made difficult by starting out with a rotten education, I can't see Allison getting very worked up about it... I mean, it's no skin off of her ass, is it. Allison can go fuck herself.
Any use of war weapons is a terrible thing; usually the people that demand the weapons' use or make light of it are those who have never been on a battlefield.
That having been said: There are different types and degrees of injury potentially caused by weapons of war (or any weapon); these injuries may be classified by type and degree of acute trauma as well as by long-term, chronic sequelae. Whereas in my opinion the horror of a -fatal- injury from weapons of war cannot really be differentiated or mitigated by weapon type, non-fatal injuries and their long-term effects on the lives of the injured are perceived to be worse if caused by chemical weapons.
For starters, the health facilities of the victim army / society is presented with a bolus of injured as well as fatally injured whose suffering is usually more severe and of a longer duration than that of victims of penetrating trauma. When the chemical injury cases are released from acute care, the long-term morbidity from blistering and/or nerve agents is as gruesome if not more so than that of burns and amputations, but often presents in forms that are not easily diagnosed or treated, adding to the misery and mental anguish of the victims. A old physician I once knew told me that he'd seen two chemical exposure cases that had injuries similar to those caused by war gasses; he considered them "burned" on the inside in addition to the horrible external burns.
Chemical and biological weapons are strategic weapons- they not only create immediate fatalities, they are also used to reduce combat effectiveness by requiring the diversion of resources to care for military and civilian casualties. These weapons also damage the victim's economy and environment, and they induce indirect damage from terror in the victim population.
In my opinion they -are- more terrible than conventional weapons.
I thought depleted uranium was used for its mass, not specifically for its long-term toxic effects. Lead is toxic also, after all. And white phosphorus just burns you up faster than conventional incendiaries, what’s the problem there? It’s preferable for people to burn more slowly?
My CS professor told us that when he was a grad student, they'd have to insert s into their assembly to time data reads accurately, as they waited for a bit of data on a spinning drum to arrive underneath the read/write head.
Atheists are fundamentalists who worship something other than God.
Best statement I've read in a while.
In college I dated a (otherwise, very nice) fundamentalist girl; years later had a relationship with a girl that had more or less atheistic views.
Interacting with either on the subject was like calling a Rant() function with a parameter for "God" or "Anti-God" output. They had the same kinds of arguments, the same intensity, and the same intolerance for any views different from their own on the subject.
While we dated I enthusiastically agreed with the philosophy of each to increase the odds of getting laid.
Microsoft is still up to the same kind of dirt tricks that earned them that kind of hatred in the first place.
Doesn't MS scam an Android patent tax from most vendors? The last of that kind of thing I remember hearing about was that MS was going after Barnes and Noble's Nook, B&N decided to take them on, MS wouldn't tell them exactly what infringed and it looked good for B&N. Suddenly, MS made a "strategic investment" in B&N and I never heard another word about the litigation.
They seem to prefer milking cash from consumers and other companies than consistently making good stuff. They have their moments now and then, but the moments are getting fewer and farther between. Must be easier to scam.
You wish to silence me because my opinion is different than yours. That isn't really what free speech is about.
He stated his opinion that you are a shill, then asked others to review your past posts in order to support his opinion... this is a topic unto itself; and is open to debate, just as the opinions stated in your previous posts are still open for debate. You could have said something like: "...drop a bookmark there and we'll come back to it, but let's keep talking about Western police and intelligence agencies vs the raw power of Soviet Communism."
Instead, you assert that his statement of opinion is evidence of his desire to "silence" you in this thread- which seems itself to be an over-the-top statement guaranteed to stifle further debate on either subject... and casting (for me, at least), a bit of a shroud of doubt over your motives; now I'm motivated to take a few minutes and look over your past posts to see what he was talking about.
Or in other words I think Ballmer is a relatively passive leader...
Christ, I'd hate to see the "active leader" version of Ballmer... How many chairs does he have to throw to qualify? Then again, maybe I'm confusing "Active" with "Aggressive".
You're better off buying the stand alone. The 2 year subscription will cost $240 + $299 = $539! That's insane!
Stand-alone or not, if I can't play the games I purchase without being connected, and IF those games are tied to one and only one machine, then I'm done- I'm not angry, I just don't need an XBox 720 that badly- What revolutionary change in my gaming experience will be worth restrictions and the chunk of cash up front (not to mention the Live Gold membership fees)? Always-connected benefits MS and their partners, not me.
I owned 2 original XBoxes and later purchased 2 360's (one for me, one for the kids... actually 3, as I bought one of the newest 360's to replace a box that RROD'd). We also purchased I don't know how many games over the years; I'm sure the cash outlay was in the thousands.
I'm just one person and as an individual I don't figure much into Microsoft's decisions, but I don't see what value is added for me with Microsoft's 720 strategy.
There are a lot of other options available, It's time to start checking them out in earnest.
Mysidia- I know I'm coming in sort of late with this question.... Do you have an opinion either way about Uduntu? I read an article where the guy was singing its praises, but I'm too green with Linux to know if he's spouting or not. Thanks.
I remember a story from Niven's "Draco Tavern" where an explorer that returned from a civilization with advanced biotech was being paid royalties on his clones. The Glick civilization considered his cloned self to be a delicacy- no ethical problems because they grew the clones without brains. I can't see why the explorer was upset- everybody profited.
Federal law trumps state law. this was nothing more than a hissy fit.
It's not even that- It's show-boating; it's chest-pounding and marketing to Texas voters. Remember when they were going to pass a bill outlawing certain kinds of TSA searches at Texas airports? While it would be fine with me, it's the same kind of thing- they know they won't get anywhere with it, but they can point to it at election time.
Slashdot Mirror
Even then, their power is very limited by the political school boards...
Tell me about it- the public elementary school we attended was below average and needed all kinds of help. So happened that during about a 3-year window a group of -very- active parents were at the school at the same time. We managed to fund after-school activities, playground equipment, and after reaching out to some donors, we actually accumulated enough money to build on an extension to the library- no capital costs at all to the district.
We spoke to officials all through the district before we started beating the bushes for money; each and every one thought it was a great idea. We also asked the donors to talk to high-level contacts in the district to be sure- No problem. We took almost two years to raise the money, but as we were starting to engage the architects to draw plans that the district could approve, we were told to stand down, because it wouldn't be fair to the other elementary schools in the district that didn't have nice libraries. When we went back and spoke to the officials that previously had said it was a good idea, the responses were along the lines of "we didn't think you'd actually do it".
Understand what you're saying, but I actually don't live in too bad of a neighborhood; it's not wealthy, just average / quiet. We're in sort of a corner of the area that's zoned to this school. Bought the house before my son was born, and at the time, the other areas in the zone that feed the school wouldn't be called nice, but they weren't bad, either. Several factors were evaluated that made it worth it to fork over tuition for private school rather than move.
I was with you until your last sentence and then you showed your true colors. So you lost your argument by showing that you are nothing more then a prat.
Imagine my concern.
The school we’re zoned to is not just tough, it’s dangerous- Most teachers don’t try to teach; if they prevent major crimes from occurring, they've had a good day. The stories that come out of that place are gut-wrenching; the kids there aren't being prepared for squat. I've busted my ass and sacrificed a lot to send my son to a private school as a result.
What little good that could come of us participating in the local public school would pale in comparison to the harm it has the potential of doing to my son- not only to his well being day-to-day, but to his chances of success afterwards as well. I'm not sacrificing my son's future on account of Allison's idealist prattle. From what I've seen, not many of the our local public school system's participants: teachers, parents (especially the parents), or the students give a rat's ass about making their school system any better.
I attended a very tough school while growing up, and learned more about avoiding having my ass kicked than anything else that I needed for college- as a result, it took two tries and 6 years to finish my first degree- my first two years were spent learning what I should have learned in high school.
Allison Benedikt has her opinion of me, and I have my opinion of her. My son is my responsibility until he's grown; if his young life is made difficult by starting out with a rotten education, I can't see Allison getting very worked up about it... I mean, it's no skin off of her ass, is it. Allison can go fuck herself.
Any use of war weapons is a terrible thing; usually the people that demand the weapons' use or make light of it are those who have never been on a battlefield.
That having been said: There are different types and degrees of injury potentially caused by weapons of war (or any weapon); these injuries may be classified by type and degree of acute trauma as well as by long-term, chronic sequelae. Whereas in my opinion the horror of a -fatal- injury from weapons of war cannot really be differentiated or mitigated by weapon type, non-fatal injuries and their long-term effects on the lives of the injured are perceived to be worse if caused by chemical weapons.
For starters, the health facilities of the victim army / society is presented with a bolus of injured as well as fatally injured whose suffering is usually more severe and of a longer duration than that of victims of penetrating trauma. When the chemical injury cases are released from acute care, the long-term morbidity from blistering and/or nerve agents is as gruesome if not more so than that of burns and amputations, but often presents in forms that are not easily diagnosed or treated, adding to the misery and mental anguish of the victims. A old physician I once knew told me that he'd seen two chemical exposure cases that had injuries similar to those caused by war gasses; he considered them "burned" on the inside in addition to the horrible external burns.
Chemical and biological weapons are strategic weapons- they not only create immediate fatalities, they are also used to reduce combat effectiveness by requiring the diversion of resources to care for military and civilian casualties. These weapons also damage the victim's economy and environment, and they induce indirect damage from terror in the victim population.
In my opinion they -are- more terrible than conventional weapons.
You're missing the point; the US uses these weapons for good, Syria uses it on their own people.
Normally, I can spot the implied /irony tag. Tell me that you're being ironic.
I thought depleted uranium was used for its mass, not specifically for its long-term toxic effects. Lead is toxic also, after all. And white phosphorus just burns you up faster than conventional incendiaries, what’s the problem there? It’s preferable for people to burn more slowly?
What's your point, Ludwig?
Seriously - does this guy have any clue...
Not one little bit, it appears.
When I was in school, I always wondered what people actually -did- with a PhD in Philosophy, now... I know.
...damn tags- put two angle brackets around "NOOP" and it disappeared. Should read: "they'd have to insert NOOP's into their assembly".
My CS professor told us that when he was a grad student, they'd have to insert s into their assembly to time data reads accurately, as they waited for a bit of data on a spinning drum to arrive underneath the read/write head.
...If you dropped your punch card deck it could get scrambled.
For me it was when you dropped your punch card deck, it would be scrambled.
Atheists are fundamentalists who worship something other than God.
Best statement I've read in a while.
In college I dated a (otherwise, very nice) fundamentalist girl; years later had a relationship with a girl that had more or less atheistic views.
Interacting with either on the subject was like calling a Rant() function with a parameter for "God" or "Anti-God" output. They had the same kinds of arguments, the same intensity, and the same intolerance for any views different from their own on the subject.
While we dated I enthusiastically agreed with the philosophy of each to increase the odds of getting laid.
Yeah, they jumped all over upper management at Goldman Sachs and JP Morgan, didn't they?
I had similar issues with a Bionic.
Microsoft is still up to the same kind of dirt tricks that earned them that kind of hatred in the first place.
Doesn't MS scam an Android patent tax from most vendors? The last of that kind of thing I remember hearing about was that MS was going after Barnes and Noble's Nook, B&N decided to take them on, MS wouldn't tell them exactly what infringed and it looked good for B&N. Suddenly, MS made a "strategic investment" in B&N and I never heard another word about the litigation.
They seem to prefer milking cash from consumers and other companies than consistently making good stuff. They have their moments now and then, but the moments are getting fewer and farther between. Must be easier to scam.
You wish to silence me because my opinion is different than yours. That isn't really what free speech is about.
He stated his opinion that you are a shill, then asked others to review your past posts in order to support his opinion... this is a topic unto itself; and is open to debate, just as the opinions stated in your previous posts are still open for debate. You could have said something like: "...drop a bookmark there and we'll come back to it, but let's keep talking about Western police and intelligence agencies vs the raw power of Soviet Communism."
Instead, you assert that his statement of opinion is evidence of his desire to "silence" you in this thread- which seems itself to be an over-the-top statement guaranteed to stifle further debate on either subject... and casting (for me, at least), a bit of a shroud of doubt over your motives; now I'm motivated to take a few minutes and look over your past posts to see what he was talking about.
Or in other words I think Ballmer is a relatively passive leader...
Christ, I'd hate to see the "active leader" version of Ballmer... How many chairs does he have to throw to qualify? Then again, maybe I'm confusing "Active" with "Aggressive".
You're better off buying the stand alone. The 2 year subscription will cost $240 + $299 = $539! That's insane!
Stand-alone or not, if I can't play the games I purchase without being connected, and IF those games are tied to one and only one machine, then I'm done- I'm not angry, I just don't need an XBox 720 that badly- What revolutionary change in my gaming experience will be worth restrictions and the chunk of cash up front (not to mention the Live Gold membership fees)? Always-connected benefits MS and their partners, not me.
I owned 2 original XBoxes and later purchased 2 360's (one for me, one for the kids... actually 3, as I bought one of the newest 360's to replace a box that RROD'd). We also purchased I don't know how many games over the years; I'm sure the cash outlay was in the thousands.
I'm just one person and as an individual I don't figure much into Microsoft's decisions, but I don't see what value is added for me with Microsoft's 720 strategy.
There are a lot of other options available, It's time to start checking them out in earnest.
You silly laptop gamers, *real* gamers use desktops :s
I thought they used d20's.
Sorry- meant to say Fuduntu.
Mysidia- I know I'm coming in sort of late with this question.... Do you have an opinion either way about Uduntu? I read an article where the guy was singing its praises, but I'm too green with Linux to know if he's spouting or not. Thanks.
Tell us more Benny- How did they sexually harass her?
#TIMMAH!
I remember a story from Niven's "Draco Tavern" where an explorer that returned from a civilization with advanced biotech was being paid royalties on his clones. The Glick civilization considered his cloned self to be a delicacy- no ethical problems because they grew the clones without brains. I can't see why the explorer was upset- everybody profited.
Federal law trumps state law. this was nothing more than a hissy fit.
It's not even that- It's show-boating; it's chest-pounding and marketing to Texas voters. Remember when they were going to pass a bill outlawing certain kinds of TSA searches at Texas airports? While it would be fine with me, it's the same kind of thing- they know they won't get anywhere with it, but they can point to it at election time.