but the difference is that the elderly, while they're being corrupt, actually think they're right.
Everyone thinks they're right. A young person is just as capable of rationalizing away his/her own corruption as an elder is. It's a matter of personality, not age.
As Douglas Adams observed, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, "Anyone capable of getting himself elected President should on no account be allowed to actually do the job." I'd generalize that to include most elected offices.
I'm not sure how you mean this, but I did take Latin in high school (all 4 years), and while I don't use it for anything now, I know that it has improved my understanding and knowledge of English significantly.
Yeah. They should have thrown in a 'haha', a 'wtf?', and a '42'. Then it would make sense!
-Mike
(who is starting to get punchy from working all night)
Re:Innocent until proven guilty?
on
NASA Fires Astronaut
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
That only applies to criminal trials (at least in theory; the principle does seem to be weakening these days). Cause for firing someone or for prevailing in a civil suit doesn't require that high a standard. What she did do, even if she hasn't formally been found guilty of the charges against her, constituted conduct unbecoming someone in her position. Dismissing her from the Navy might require a conviction or a court-martial, but they certainly have cause to kick her out of the astronaut corps.
You can also look at the evidence against the Book of Mormon here.
In particular, you may want to read the commentary on how the Jaredites allegedly came to the Americas, according to the BoM, here.
Then there's a nice comparison of current LDS doctrine vs. what the Book of Mormon teaches here. Hint: LDS doctrine these days (or, in fact, ever) bears very little resemblance to the "Fullness of the Gospel" as given in the Book of Mormon.
N.B.: I'm an ex-Mormon, in large part because of contradictions I uncovered in LDS scripture and history. In fact, I came to realize that Mormonism was a hoax while following along in Sunday School; we were studying the book of Jacob, verse 2:24, which states that the practice of polygamy cannot be justified by the Biblical examples of David and Solomon, which were "abominable". However, I had recently read in the Doctrine and Covenants (132:38-39) that they were fully justified in their practice, except for those "wives and concubines which were not given to them". I flipped to that section in my scriptures to verify what I'd recalled, and I went numb on the spot, able only to repeat to myself, "It's all a hoax! I've been deceived all along!" Before that, I was a believing Mormon, living what I thought to be the Gospel as best I could, going to the Temple, etc. Other than taking up drinking coffee, I haven't really changed that much, either. But I'm a lot more tolerant of other people's choices in life than I ever was before.
I've considered the Book of Mormon, and even believed that Joseph Smith was a prophet, seer and revelator, as were his successors. I now know that it is worth a pile of fetid dingoes' kidneys.
I'm no fan of Microsoft, but this is a very good point. They are selling advertising, and they did what they needed to do when the problem caused by this particular advertiser came to their attention. They can't be expected to avoid every possible problem in advance.
Yeah, I saw that. So? The disclaimer I found is in the fine print, obviously meant to be stumbled across after a few minutes of head-scratching and asking yourself, "Are these guys for real?!" Besides, the 'tip', "Don't dual boot linux (this is how viruses spread)", referenced by another reply to your OP, is a dead giveaway. I can't imagine even the biggest Microsoft fanboys making that claim in earnest.:)
This site is in no way affiliated with Microsoft, although we should be. We in no way receive direct compensation through microsoft, although we should. Not everyone can tell the difference between satire and the truth. Those who can't should not be allowed to use a web browser. Everything on this page is potentially a complete fabrication and/or outright lie
The one I worked for in indy never made any revenue in the past 10 years..
how did they pay you???
My guess would be that they got some kind of funding by dazzling investors with buzzwords and pie-in-the-sky promises. Remember that 10 years ago was during the big dot com boom, when almost anyone with some half-baked scheme involving the internet could get money thrown at them by some desperate venture capitalist trying to score the next Google or some such.
In a way, I almost do have such a DB of users.:) I have my own domain, and liberally use different addresses within it; when I see the same spam at half a dozen to a dozen addresses, I have no trouble at all identifying it as such.:)
I've been getting that sort of thing the past few days, with subject lines like "XXXian missile shoots down XXXian Jet!" or "Sadam Hussein Alive!" (yes, they did spell "Saddam" with only one 'd'). The ones I've been seeing seem to have an executable attached, something like FullStory.exe or VideoClip.exe. Yeah, riiiiiight, I'm going to open one of those!:)
A call. Meaning you weren't there. So you spent effort to go back, compare keyboards, and complain.
Not quite. If you look closely, you'll see that the OP wrote, "I looked at his old keyboard and compared it to mine" (i.e., the one in his own office, which was the same as the user's new one). Not, "I went back to his office and compared it to his new one".
And he didn't say that he did not return the old keyboard, he merely expressed his annoyance that the user made what he viewed as a silly and arbitrary request; as long as he didn't vent at the user or someone who might pass the comment along, there's no real harm. Although I might want the old keyboard back too, if keys that I used heavily were rearranged; if you're a touch-typist, that sort of thing can be pretty annoying until you retrain your fingers.
-Mike
Re:$5.21 by buying the book at Amazon.com!
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 1
Thanks, but I don't support referral trolls.
-Mike
Re:Mod me offtopic, but...
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 1
Ah; sorry, I didn't quite get what you were saying in your OP. Well, I don't know why someone would freely talk politics and not say who they voted for. If I'm comfortable enough with someone to talk about my politics in the first place, I'm fine about saying who I voted for.
-Mike
Re:Mod me offtopic, but...
on
Who won?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Simple; if anyone can find out how you actually voted, it's easy to use that information against you. If your boss is a fervent Republican, and you vote Democrat, it's just barely possible that you might be passed over for that promotion or raise, or perhaps caught up in the next "Workforce Reduction". As things stand, you can refrain from talking politics around your boss and nod politely when he makes some political comment you vehemently disagree with. There are laws against discrimination, but don't try to tell me that people don't get around them.
Also, it makes the purchase and sale of votes possible. "I'll pay you $100 to vote Democratic. Just bring your receipt that proves your Dem vote, and you get the cash."
Didn't you mean, "Correlation != Causation"? Oh, well; at least you didn't say "Correlation = Causation", since that would have probably caused a memory leak or something.;)
A lot of times, those of us in the IT field seem to forget that we spent a lot of time learning what we know. What is second nature to us is incomprehensible to someone who hasn't spent years in school and on the job working with computers. Did you know what DHCP was when you first started learning about computers? Or RAM? Or malware? Of course not. You weren't born with the knowledge, you had to acquire it. The same is true of everyone. The problem is, there are only so many hours in the day, and everyone has different interests and career goals. Someone can be intelligent enough to understand IT without having had the opportunity to acquire the foundation needed to do so, because of the time spent learning something else. You probably can't perform brain surgery, and a brain surgeon probably can't figure out what to do if the computer won't boot (individual exceptions may apply, of course). Everyone is ignorant about many things, and most are knowledgeable about a few things. Understanding this will help you have the perspective needed to be patient with other people's lack of knowledge in your field.
They wouldn't have started out more advanced than we are now. It seems reasonable to assume that most advanced civilizations would at least have passed through a phase of using radio technology. They may have stumbled across a different or better technology first, but if that's the case, we simply don't know what else to look for (if we did, we'd be using it ourselves). Looking for radio waves is something we do know how to do, and if we want to look for ETI, that at least seems to be a reasonable starting point.
Slashdot Mirror
but the difference is that the elderly, while they're being corrupt, actually think they're right.
Everyone thinks they're right. A young person is just as capable of rationalizing away his/her own corruption as an elder is. It's a matter of personality, not age.
As Douglas Adams observed, in The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, "Anyone capable of getting himself elected President should on no account be allowed to actually do the job." I'd generalize that to include most elected offices.
-Mike
I'm not sure how you mean this, but I did take Latin in high school (all 4 years), and while I don't use it for anything now, I know that it has improved my understanding and knowledge of English significantly.
-Mike
Yeah. They should have thrown in a 'haha', a 'wtf?', and a '42'. Then it would make sense!
-Mike
(who is starting to get punchy from working all night)
That only applies to criminal trials (at least in theory; the principle does seem to be weakening these days). Cause for firing someone or for prevailing in a civil suit doesn't require that high a standard. What she did do, even if she hasn't formally been found guilty of the charges against her, constituted conduct unbecoming someone in her position. Dismissing her from the Navy might require a conviction or a court-martial, but they certainly have cause to kick her out of the astronaut corps.
-Mike
Hmmm.... I suppose bending over WOULD feel better with some lube.
-Mike
You can also look at the evidence against the Book of Mormon here.
In particular, you may want to read the commentary on how the Jaredites allegedly came to the Americas, according to the BoM, here.
Then there's a nice comparison of current LDS doctrine vs. what the Book of Mormon teaches here. Hint: LDS doctrine these days (or, in fact, ever) bears very little resemblance to the "Fullness of the Gospel" as given in the Book of Mormon.
N.B.: I'm an ex-Mormon, in large part because of contradictions I uncovered in LDS scripture and history. In fact, I came to realize that Mormonism was a hoax while following along in Sunday School; we were studying the book of Jacob, verse 2:24, which states that the practice of polygamy cannot be justified by the Biblical examples of David and Solomon, which were "abominable". However, I had recently read in the Doctrine and Covenants (132:38-39) that they were fully justified in their practice, except for those "wives and concubines which were not given to them". I flipped to that section in my scriptures to verify what I'd recalled, and I went numb on the spot, able only to repeat to myself, "It's all a hoax! I've been deceived all along!" Before that, I was a believing Mormon, living what I thought to be the Gospel as best I could, going to the Temple, etc. Other than taking up drinking coffee, I haven't really changed that much, either. But I'm a lot more tolerant of other people's choices in life than I ever was before.
I've considered the Book of Mormon, and even believed that Joseph Smith was a prophet, seer and revelator, as were his successors. I now know that it is worth a pile of fetid dingoes' kidneys.
-Mike
I'm no fan of Microsoft, but this is a very good point. They are selling advertising, and they did what they needed to do when the problem caused by this particular advertiser came to their attention. They can't be expected to avoid every possible problem in advance.
-Mike
Yeah, I saw that. So? The disclaimer I found is in the fine print, obviously meant to be stumbled across after a few minutes of head-scratching and asking yourself, "Are these guys for real?!" Besides, the 'tip', "Don't dual boot linux (this is how viruses spread)", referenced by another reply to your OP, is a dead giveaway. I can't imagine even the biggest Microsoft fanboys making that claim in earnest. :)
-Mike
Yep, it's a spoof site.
-Mike
That picture is a fake. If he were really wearing the One Ring, he wouldn't be visible!
-Mike
John? Is that you?
-Mike
Is that an English football, or an American football?
What?! I don't know that! AAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhh.....
-Mike
The one I worked for in indy never made any revenue in the past 10 years..
how did they pay you???
My guess would be that they got some kind of funding by dazzling investors with buzzwords and pie-in-the-sky promises. Remember that 10 years ago was during the big dot com boom, when almost anyone with some half-baked scheme involving the internet could get money thrown at them by some desperate venture capitalist trying to score the next Google or some such.
-Mike
In a way, I almost do have such a DB of users. :) I have my own domain, and liberally use different addresses within it; when I see the same spam at half a dozen to a dozen addresses, I have no trouble at all identifying it as such. :)
-Mike
I've been getting that sort of thing the past few days, with subject lines like "XXXian missile shoots down XXXian Jet!" or "Sadam Hussein Alive!" (yes, they did spell "Saddam" with only one 'd'). The ones I've been seeing seem to have an executable attached, something like FullStory.exe or VideoClip.exe. Yeah, riiiiiight, I'm going to open one of those! :)
-Mike
TFA is talking about US court decisions, etc. Hence, it stands to reason that the Constitution being referenced is that of the US.
-Mike
A call. Meaning you weren't there. So you spent effort to go back, compare keyboards, and complain.
Not quite. If you look closely, you'll see that the OP wrote, "I looked at his old keyboard and compared it to mine" (i.e., the one in his own office, which was the same as the user's new one). Not, "I went back to his office and compared it to his new one".
And he didn't say that he did not return the old keyboard, he merely expressed his annoyance that the user made what he viewed as a silly and arbitrary request; as long as he didn't vent at the user or someone who might pass the comment along, there's no real harm. Although I might want the old keyboard back too, if keys that I used heavily were rearranged; if you're a touch-typist, that sort of thing can be pretty annoying until you retrain your fingers.
-Mike
Thanks, but I don't support referral trolls.
-Mike
Ah; sorry, I didn't quite get what you were saying in your OP. Well, I don't know why someone would freely talk politics and not say who they voted for. If I'm comfortable enough with someone to talk about my politics in the first place, I'm fine about saying who I voted for.
-Mike
Simple; if anyone can find out how you actually voted, it's easy to use that information against you. If your boss is a fervent Republican, and you vote Democrat, it's just barely possible that you might be passed over for that promotion or raise, or perhaps caught up in the next "Workforce Reduction". As things stand, you can refrain from talking politics around your boss and nod politely when he makes some political comment you vehemently disagree with. There are laws against discrimination, but don't try to tell me that people don't get around them.
Also, it makes the purchase and sale of votes possible. "I'll pay you $100 to vote Democratic. Just bring your receipt that proves your Dem vote, and you get the cash."
-Mike
He'll do anything for a buck these days. Show me the MONEY!
-Mike
Corelation == Causation
;)
Didn't you mean, "Correlation != Causation"? Oh, well; at least you didn't say "Correlation = Causation", since that would have probably caused a memory leak or something.
-Mike
A lot of times, those of us in the IT field seem to forget that we spent a lot of time learning what we know. What is second nature to us is incomprehensible to someone who hasn't spent years in school and on the job working with computers. Did you know what DHCP was when you first started learning about computers? Or RAM? Or malware? Of course not. You weren't born with the knowledge, you had to acquire it. The same is true of everyone. The problem is, there are only so many hours in the day, and everyone has different interests and career goals. Someone can be intelligent enough to understand IT without having had the opportunity to acquire the foundation needed to do so, because of the time spent learning something else. You probably can't perform brain surgery, and a brain surgeon probably can't figure out what to do if the computer won't boot (individual exceptions may apply, of course). Everyone is ignorant about many things, and most are knowledgeable about a few things. Understanding this will help you have the perspective needed to be patient with other people's lack of knowledge in your field.
-Mike
So school policy is now being dictated by a guy named "Frosty"?
Yes. And he's pissed.
-Mike
They wouldn't have started out more advanced than we are now. It seems reasonable to assume that most advanced civilizations would at least have passed through a phase of using radio technology. They may have stumbled across a different or better technology first, but if that's the case, we simply don't know what else to look for (if we did, we'd be using it ourselves). Looking for radio waves is something we do know how to do, and if we want to look for ETI, that at least seems to be a reasonable starting point.
-Mike