The GOP is willing to hit huge sources of spending like what, exactly? The military? Because IIRC, the GOP is all about military spending. Maybe you meant things like funding for the NSF or NASA or other things like that? Because if you did, those are literal drops in the bucket. Sure, we can cut them, but it won't do anything - it's like putting a bandaid on a papercut when your jugular is severed.
The Democrats want to drive down tax collection by raising taxes? How exactly does that work? Are you assuming that we're on the right half of the Laffer curve? Because such an assumption is entirely unwarranted, as far as I'm aware; we recently cut taxes, and revenues fell. This kinda sorta implies that cutting taxes even more will make revenues fall even more; perhaps we should do the unthinkable and raise them, especially in the areas which we previously cut?
Defense is about the only part of the Federal budget which has been consistently decreasing over the last 50 years as a percentage of GDP.
Way to lie with statistics, man. "Decreasing as a percentage of GDP" is an entirely meaningless metric - within that definition, the defense budget could be going up, down or sideways and there's no way of knowing.
For instance, if both the GDP and the defense budget are increasing, but the GDP is increasing faster, then your statement would still be true and entirely misleading.
It also doesn't account for the initial retardedly high value of our defense budget; for instance, if defense were 10% of GDP one year and 9% of GDP the next year, your statement would still be true and defense spending would still be ridiculously high.
It makes me wonder why you didn't just provide a link to the actual, inflation adjusted dollar amounts put in to defense (like here, for instance). Presumably because it shows a rise in real spending on the defense department over the past decade, which kinda contradicts your point?
It makes me really sad, too, because with Nokia and RIM becoming irrelevant, there's not many other smartphone manufacturers out there who are willing to put a physical keyboard on their phones. There's very few models out there with one these days.
Do people have to be groped? Honestly, I'm not up-to-date enough on the latest explosives to know what kind of damage a fake boob or a full diaper's worth of C4 can do to a plane. I'll leave that decision to the experts.
Statistically, no. The rate of terrorism in the USA with the TSA is equivalent to the rate of terrorism without the TSA.
Basically, we would be just as safe if they gave up on all this security bullshit and just let everyone into the terminals like they used to.
Part of the problem is that people seem to think that a PIN must be four digits long. Most people's ATM PINs are that length, for instance, even though almost all banks support longer ones.
For the iPhone I suppose it makes sense - doesn't the iPhone require a four digit PIN? - but pretty much everywhere else in life it doesn't.
If the passengers on the planes had known that the hijackers were suicidal and were going to kill them all, they would have acted.
In fact, we know this is true because besides the planes that hit the Twin Towers and the plane that missed the Pentagon, a fourth plane was hijacked; the passengers on that plane had news of what happened to the other three planes, and knew that the terrorists were going to kill them all. It ended up crashing in the middle of Pennsylvania after the passengers attacked the hijackers.
The thing is, before 9/11 hijackers would eventually land the plane and make their demands. A true warrior picks his (or her) battles, after all, and fighting the terrorists in the air was not a winning proposition based on previous experience. Sure, the terrorists only had box cutters, but if you just wait a few hours they'll land the plane and get distracted by making their demands, at which point taking action is more reasonable. Unfortunately, this time the terrorists were suicidal, which was unknowable to the passengers until it was too late.
So no, you can't blame it on the USA being "a nation that teaches children that 'it is never right to fight'". The passengers on those airplanes did fight, once it became apparent that fighting was the proper course of action.
In other words, he never had any intention of staying with the company. He was only there for the minimum amount of time necessary for some options to vest, then he planned to cash in any windfall and move on to the next startup. Sorry, but I have no sympathy for him.
And the company had no intention of keeping him around; they were only going to pay him for as long as he was useful, at which point he would be fired and they would move on to the next tech guy.
I'm not sure why you implicitly take Skype's side here.
Who Joe Herring is, is not the issue. It's not the messenger, it's the message. Unless you want to indulge in a lot of ad hominem arguments.
Sorry. There are almost no citations in the article to back up his claims. That means that it is arguing from personal authority. Therefore, the personal authority of Joe Herring is of critical importance, because it is the only source of evidence provided to back up his claims.
Joe Herring has no personal authority. Therefore, the article rests on no evidence.
Ad hominem criticism is valid, when the initial argument is based solely on the authority of the specific hominid.
Actually, didn't you hear about Australia banning tiny titties in porn? After all, women with small breasts who are of legal age may play the role of underage girls in pornography, and that's like a single step removed from child pornography, which we all know causes nuclear devastation and must be stopped at all costs.
In a manner of speaking - what happened is that, much like the liver fluke parasite preying on an ant, Microsoft has taken control of Nokia's brain. Now, dazed and confused, Nokia is wandering up the stalk of Windows 7, where it will latch on in a vulnerable position and wait to be consumed.
The analogy kinda breaks down here, because they're probably gonna get eaten by Microsoft instead of a cow or a bird or something, but still - mind control is pretty much the only way to explain this move. Windows Mobile has such a shitty track record and the failure of the Microsoft Kin shows that the politics behind Microsoft's mobile strategy are seriously fucked up. I just don't see how Stephen Elop has managed to convince anyone that pinning Nokia's future on Windows Phone 7 is a good idea.
It's worth noting that Mexicans from more affluent areas, and more central areas in general, often are quite racist against Mexicans from border areas.
Exactly! I am never going to meet my grandparents-in-law, because they are semi-legal* Mexican immigrants into California and would object to my dark skin (I'm from Brazil). My wife tells me that her grandmother insisted on her children marrying white, and wants the next generation to do the same.
*they used a loophole that has since been closed; if they'd moved here a year or two later they would actually be illegal immigrants.
Err yeah you're right I got those numbers wrong by several orders of magnitude - it should be pounds instead of tons, and hundreds of thousands instead of millions. It's on the order of 200,000 - 600,000 lbs per year.
Most of the responsible ones are still closeted. There is a war on them, you know.
I'm pretty sure it's like that with harder drugs, too. I mean, something like 200 million tons of cocaine make it in to the USA annually; there's no way in hell that's all getting cut with baking soda and being used by poor crackheads.
I would not be surprised if a rather large portion of upper class America is addicted to cocaine, and we only hear about the ones that crash and burn - just like we only hear about alcoholics who drive in to trees one night, not the ones who have six beers for dinner every night.
Oh for fucks sake. Quit feeling persecuted. To be an American president you at least have to pay lip service to Jesus.
Indeed! We've actually reached the point where the American population is more willing to vote for an openly homosexual President than they are to vote for an openly atheist President. This is progress, of a sort, but still - 61% of respondents said that they are less likely to vote for an atheist, compared to 33% saying that they are less likely to vote for a homosexual.
Keep in mind that since you're posting the result of two translation passes, in order to get an idea of how good the translation is you have to take the square root of the error.
Yes, it's some pretty mangled English - but that's mangle^2, which can be significant and misleading.
Is it just me, or does the article just sound really confused?
I mean, sudo has little to do with user permissions or anything like that - the mnemonic is "sub user and do". It tries to change the current user to the user specified in the command line (and uses root if none is specified), and executes the command it's given. That's it. That's all it does. It doesn't have anything to do with "fine grained permissions", that sort of thing should be handled at the OS level.
It's not a sudo replacement, it's something that changes the OS security model and probably has some other junk. Even with this thing installed, sudo will still sub user and do.
The anger and hatred isn't over the science. It's about taxes. People get tired of being taxed to death.
Jesus Christ, who in the USA is being taxed to death exactly? It would be nice to see some actual comparative numbers of what you think is excessive, e.g people who make X per year pay a total of Y% in taxes, which is too much compared to Z% historically or E% elsewhere in the world - instead of just this hyperbolic "people are being taxed to death!" without any specifics.
I think you will find, if you look in to it, that people in the USA already pay ridiculously low taxes. Especially people in the high income brackets.
And your appeal for raw data is particularly laughable, given that it's the usual gambit that deniers throw out as if it's all some vast conspiracy and if only scientists would spend every waking moment satisfying specious FOIA requests this conspiracy would be revealed.
As always, there are some proprietary datasets that are not publicly available, but they form only a small fraction of the total data used in most scientific papers.
In particular, they were instrumental in accomplishing the identification of members of targeted ethnic groups, while being fully aware of the Nazi party's intent to persecute them. They provided the information infrastructure necessary to round up all of the jews and gypsies, knowing at the very least that they were to be rounded up.
Exactly! It was a now-classic consulting scenario: the business (e.g, Nazi Germany) buys a big shiny piece of hardware, and with it they get some IBM consultants to customize it. The business comes up with its business rules, e.g, every generation the Jewishness halves if a Jew marries a non-Jew, anyone who is at least 1/64th Jewish is considered a Jew, and here's some census data that says who has claimed to be a Jew up until the current moment who has married whom (gotta ferret out those crypto-Jews, sneaky though they are), and we want names and addresses out of it. Then the consultants go hmm okay that'll be $lots and implement the system.
It would have absolutely impossible for IBM's consultant programmers to have worked on this project without realizing that Hitler would be using this information to round up citizens based on their ethnicity. I can totally accept that the consultants didn't realize that the Jews would be killed (it's hard to believe that people are going to die as a result of your work, honestly), but there was no way for them to have done this without realizing that, you know, the names and addresses are popping out of our tabulating machine and going straight to the Gestapo who all run out waving truncheons.
Years later, we look back and see beauty in what we discarded as ugly. A 1960 Cadillac Coupe DeVille is stunningly beautiful today, but in 1976 you'd be embarrassed to drive one (unless you were 20 years old driving your dad's old car in which case you thought it was the coolest thing rolling).
Our standards of beauty are now set by marketing agencies working on behalf of their corporate clients. And nobody, not one person, is immune.
What the hell are you talking about? That car just screams zeerust - I mean, look at those ridiculous fins! Even if it could go particularly fast (yeah right), I doubt they'd do anything useful. And that oversized grill! There's no way the engine needs that much cooling, it just looks ridiculous, and it's going to kill your already shitty mileage. And mileage is going to be a problem - the whole thing is so goddamn huge despite seating what, four or five people? What's the rest of that weight for, to make Saudi Arabia happy in a decade, when the cost of oil spikes up? You could fit a whole family of dead bodies in that trunk, except you'd have to climb in yourself to put the last ones in because that thing is going to be cavernous!
Basically, that thing is a boat that somehow sprouted wheels and decided to wander around on land. If that failure of design was an important part of the history of American car aesthetics, then there's a really good reason why all the American car manufacturers went out of business a few decades later.
As to the point of your post: as counter-evidence, I provide you with the Pontiac Aztek. If marketers really had as much sway as you seem to believe, then that thing would have sold; instead, it was panned as the ugliest car ever. How does your theory explain that?
In fact, 2010 tied 1998 as the warmest year on record according to the NOAA.
Hah! See, your own data shows that there's been no change in temperature between 2010 and 1998! The fact that you can draw a straight line between them means that nothing's changing, right?
Slashdot Mirror
I'm so confused.
The GOP is willing to hit huge sources of spending like what, exactly? The military? Because IIRC, the GOP is all about military spending. Maybe you meant things like funding for the NSF or NASA or other things like that? Because if you did, those are literal drops in the bucket. Sure, we can cut them, but it won't do anything - it's like putting a bandaid on a papercut when your jugular is severed.
The Democrats want to drive down tax collection by raising taxes? How exactly does that work? Are you assuming that we're on the right half of the Laffer curve? Because such an assumption is entirely unwarranted, as far as I'm aware; we recently cut taxes, and revenues fell. This kinda sorta implies that cutting taxes even more will make revenues fall even more; perhaps we should do the unthinkable and raise them, especially in the areas which we previously cut?
Way to lie with statistics, man. "Decreasing as a percentage of GDP" is an entirely meaningless metric - within that definition, the defense budget could be going up, down or sideways and there's no way of knowing.
For instance, if both the GDP and the defense budget are increasing, but the GDP is increasing faster, then your statement would still be true and entirely misleading.
It also doesn't account for the initial retardedly high value of our defense budget; for instance, if defense were 10% of GDP one year and 9% of GDP the next year, your statement would still be true and defense spending would still be ridiculously high.
It makes me wonder why you didn't just provide a link to the actual, inflation adjusted dollar amounts put in to defense (like here, for instance). Presumably because it shows a rise in real spending on the defense department over the past decade, which kinda contradicts your point?
Well, the Catholic Church certainly seems to agree with him, so there's pretty widespread religious support for that position.
It makes me really sad, too, because with Nokia and RIM becoming irrelevant, there's not many other smartphone manufacturers out there who are willing to put a physical keyboard on their phones. There's very few models out there with one these days.
Statistically, no. The rate of terrorism in the USA with the TSA is equivalent to the rate of terrorism without the TSA.
Basically, we would be just as safe if they gave up on all this security bullshit and just let everyone into the terminals like they used to.
Part of the problem is that people seem to think that a PIN must be four digits long. Most people's ATM PINs are that length, for instance, even though almost all banks support longer ones.
For the iPhone I suppose it makes sense - doesn't the iPhone require a four digit PIN? - but pretty much everywhere else in life it doesn't.
Well, not really.
If the passengers on the planes had known that the hijackers were suicidal and were going to kill them all, they would have acted.
In fact, we know this is true because besides the planes that hit the Twin Towers and the plane that missed the Pentagon, a fourth plane was hijacked; the passengers on that plane had news of what happened to the other three planes, and knew that the terrorists were going to kill them all. It ended up crashing in the middle of Pennsylvania after the passengers attacked the hijackers.
The thing is, before 9/11 hijackers would eventually land the plane and make their demands. A true warrior picks his (or her) battles, after all, and fighting the terrorists in the air was not a winning proposition based on previous experience. Sure, the terrorists only had box cutters, but if you just wait a few hours they'll land the plane and get distracted by making their demands, at which point taking action is more reasonable. Unfortunately, this time the terrorists were suicidal, which was unknowable to the passengers until it was too late.
So no, you can't blame it on the USA being "a nation that teaches children that 'it is never right to fight'". The passengers on those airplanes did fight, once it became apparent that fighting was the proper course of action.
And the company had no intention of keeping him around; they were only going to pay him for as long as he was useful, at which point he would be fired and they would move on to the next tech guy.
I'm not sure why you implicitly take Skype's side here.
Sorry. There are almost no citations in the article to back up his claims. That means that it is arguing from personal authority. Therefore, the personal authority of Joe Herring is of critical importance, because it is the only source of evidence provided to back up his claims.
Joe Herring has no personal authority. Therefore, the article rests on no evidence.
Ad hominem criticism is valid, when the initial argument is based solely on the authority of the specific hominid.
Actually, didn't you hear about Australia banning tiny titties in porn? After all, women with small breasts who are of legal age may play the role of underage girls in pornography, and that's like a single step removed from child pornography, which we all know causes nuclear devastation and must be stopped at all costs.
In a manner of speaking - what happened is that, much like the liver fluke parasite preying on an ant, Microsoft has taken control of Nokia's brain. Now, dazed and confused, Nokia is wandering up the stalk of Windows 7, where it will latch on in a vulnerable position and wait to be consumed.
The analogy kinda breaks down here, because they're probably gonna get eaten by Microsoft instead of a cow or a bird or something, but still - mind control is pretty much the only way to explain this move. Windows Mobile has such a shitty track record and the failure of the Microsoft Kin shows that the politics behind Microsoft's mobile strategy are seriously fucked up. I just don't see how Stephen Elop has managed to convince anyone that pinning Nokia's future on Windows Phone 7 is a good idea.
Exactly! I am never going to meet my grandparents-in-law, because they are semi-legal* Mexican immigrants into California and would object to my dark skin (I'm from Brazil). My wife tells me that her grandmother insisted on her children marrying white, and wants the next generation to do the same.
*they used a loophole that has since been closed; if they'd moved here a year or two later they would actually be illegal immigrants.
Err yeah you're right I got those numbers wrong by several orders of magnitude - it should be pounds instead of tons, and hundreds of thousands instead of millions. It's on the order of 200,000 - 600,000 lbs per year.
Maybe I'm the one who should lay off the crack :)
Still though, that's whole lot of cocaine.
I'm pretty sure it's like that with harder drugs, too. I mean, something like 200 million tons of cocaine make it in to the USA annually; there's no way in hell that's all getting cut with baking soda and being used by poor crackheads.
I would not be surprised if a rather large portion of upper class America is addicted to cocaine, and we only hear about the ones that crash and burn - just like we only hear about alcoholics who drive in to trees one night, not the ones who have six beers for dinner every night.
Indeed! We've actually reached the point where the American population is more willing to vote for an openly homosexual President than they are to vote for an openly atheist President. This is progress, of a sort, but still - 61% of respondents said that they are less likely to vote for an atheist, compared to 33% saying that they are less likely to vote for a homosexual.
I kinda wish someone had just given Tesla his own well-funded lab and told him to go wild.
Even if he never came up with anything, the stories would have been worth it.
Oh god yes. The sooner we get rid of that retarded X.99 price point the better. It's absolutely ridiculous and it doesn't fool anyone.
Keep in mind that since you're posting the result of two translation passes, in order to get an idea of how good the translation is you have to take the square root of the error.
Yes, it's some pretty mangled English - but that's mangle^2, which can be significant and misleading.
According to another post, Bob Pease actually died while driving back from Jim Williams' funeral. That's pretty sad.
(I was going to say "ironic" just to tweak the word usage Nazis, but this is too sad for such things)
Is it just me, or does the article just sound really confused?
I mean, sudo has little to do with user permissions or anything like that - the mnemonic is "sub user and do". It tries to change the current user to the user specified in the command line (and uses root if none is specified), and executes the command it's given. That's it. That's all it does. It doesn't have anything to do with "fine grained permissions", that sort of thing should be handled at the OS level.
It's not a sudo replacement, it's something that changes the OS security model and probably has some other junk. Even with this thing installed, sudo will still sub user and do.
Jesus Christ, who in the USA is being taxed to death exactly? It would be nice to see some actual comparative numbers of what you think is excessive, e.g people who make X per year pay a total of Y% in taxes, which is too much compared to Z% historically or E% elsewhere in the world - instead of just this hyperbolic "people are being taxed to death!" without any specifics.
I think you will find, if you look in to it, that people in the USA already pay ridiculously low taxes. Especially people in the high income brackets.
That, and the vast majority of the raw data is available:
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/data-sources/
As always, there are some proprietary datasets that are not publicly available, but they form only a small fraction of the total data used in most scientific papers.
Exactly! It was a now-classic consulting scenario: the business (e.g, Nazi Germany) buys a big shiny piece of hardware, and with it they get some IBM consultants to customize it. The business comes up with its business rules, e.g, every generation the Jewishness halves if a Jew marries a non-Jew, anyone who is at least 1/64th Jewish is considered a Jew, and here's some census data that says who has claimed to be a Jew up until the current moment who has married whom (gotta ferret out those crypto-Jews, sneaky though they are), and we want names and addresses out of it. Then the consultants go hmm okay that'll be $lots and implement the system.
It would have absolutely impossible for IBM's consultant programmers to have worked on this project without realizing that Hitler would be using this information to round up citizens based on their ethnicity. I can totally accept that the consultants didn't realize that the Jews would be killed (it's hard to believe that people are going to die as a result of your work, honestly), but there was no way for them to have done this without realizing that, you know, the names and addresses are popping out of our tabulating machine and going straight to the Gestapo who all run out waving truncheons.
What the hell are you talking about? That car just screams zeerust - I mean, look at those ridiculous fins! Even if it could go particularly fast (yeah right), I doubt they'd do anything useful. And that oversized grill! There's no way the engine needs that much cooling, it just looks ridiculous, and it's going to kill your already shitty mileage. And mileage is going to be a problem - the whole thing is so goddamn huge despite seating what, four or five people? What's the rest of that weight for, to make Saudi Arabia happy in a decade, when the cost of oil spikes up? You could fit a whole family of dead bodies in that trunk, except you'd have to climb in yourself to put the last ones in because that thing is going to be cavernous!
Basically, that thing is a boat that somehow sprouted wheels and decided to wander around on land. If that failure of design was an important part of the history of American car aesthetics, then there's a really good reason why all the American car manufacturers went out of business a few decades later.
As to the point of your post: as counter-evidence, I provide you with the Pontiac Aztek. If marketers really had as much sway as you seem to believe, then that thing would have sold; instead, it was panned as the ugliest car ever. How does your theory explain that?
Hah! See, your own data shows that there's been no change in temperature between 2010 and 1998! The fact that you can draw a straight line between them means that nothing's changing, right?