is it "let's not use our brain day"? dangerous driving laws are there to catch people who are already driving dangerously eg. weaving all over the road. bans on using your cell phone while driving are to PREVENT dangerous driving. someone could appear to be driving perfectly fine while on the phone, but in reality none of their attention is on the road, so when billy runs out onto the road they flatten him where someone not on the phone would have seen him coming.
i agree it's stupid to try ban everything that might distract drivers, but unfortunately we have lots of stupid people so we need to take out as many oppertunities to do stupid things as possible. i strongly think smoking while driving is a major problem. i know people who have been in serious accidents because they were trying to light a cig or dropped one in their lap.
It's about doing something about the risks you can control. you can't control a child screaming but you CAN ban smoking and eating while driving (which we should) as well as cell phones.
are you retarded enough to suggest just because we can't ban all possible distractions, we should just let drivers do dangerous shit like text while driving? this sounds like the same logic as "condoms are only 99% effective so lets not bother with them!".
"and their impulses tended to be directed more towards a single person"
for a start, marriage used to be done for policial and wealth gains, and you kept a lover on the side (atleast one) for sexual gratification. this was the normal mode of operation during the victorian era of insane sexual repression, and i doubt it "improved" in the 20th century. the sexual revolution of the 60's was really all about bringing to the fore what everyone had been doing since forever. it was a revolt against the hear no evil speak no evil attitude of the 50's.
do you know WHY we have monogomy and stupid virginity pledges? because back in the day before the pill, condoms and paternatiy tests, the only way you could be SURE your wife's offspring was actually your own was if she was a virgin when you met and that she slept with no one else. after all you want your own genetic code to multiply and recieve the benefits of your hardwork.
all this crap about no sex before marriage and only having one sexual partner stems from this hangover from history.
hedonism is the pursuit of everything in EXCESS. having sex is just normal not in anyway an excess.
narcissism is a far more extreme psyhcological condition then just being horny and acting on it. that'd be like calling someone narcissistic just because they took the last coke out of the fridge.
This idea that we somehow have more sex now then in the past is the biggest load of bullcrap. guess what? people fuck, your grandma had he same urges in the 1920's as you have now.
the biological drive is exactly the same, it's just socially we are less afraid to express it, so you hear about it more.
anything the parent does directly is not going to help anyway, the kids need to work this out for themselfs, parents can only provide support. The anti bully programs being taut are a big part of the current problem, because they don't teach any real direct action on the part of the victim as being effective.
they give advice like telling the bully to stop. like that's going to do fuck all. if they aren't listening to your gurgled screams of STOP STOP after the first 5 toilet flushings, more of the same won't help. These programs each the kids if telling the bully to stop doesn't work, tell a teacher or parent, who are pretty much useless at doing anything.
the only real solution for kids being bullied is to grow enough confidence to make bullying them no longer fun. no in school course is going to give them that. they usually these people just suffer throuhg highschool then get out in the real world where life experience teachs them how to cope.
no they don't, the government has the right to enforce copyrights. Warner Brothers has the right to ALLEGE an infringement and make a complaint. anything more grants them the roles of judge, jury and executioner all in one.
If you want to argue ethics, lets debate about movie producers and actors with net worths in the 100's of millions sueing single mothers and college kids for downloading a few movies they otherwise wouldn't pay to see anyway.
agreed. to suggest this kind of thing never used to happen is to suggest humans previously lacked a social pecking order.
What makes the problem greater these days is that attacking someone through a website lacks the human feed back. it doesn't feel like a person you attacking it's a faceless computer. a recent study of road rage showed the reason people get so angry at other people on the road is because their anger is directed at a car not a person. when the people driving could see the other persons face, they were much more forgiving. we look at the other person's face for emotional reactions, when we can't see that we feel ok with saying stuff we'd NEVER say to another persons face.
the scary thing about it is this is the same reason psychopaths are able to violently murder people and feel nothing. the inability to empathize.
yes it's just you. MS have control now, they own the desktop.
this idea that linux is somehow got them worried is just the linux crowd beating off, it's even more obvious with titles like "the battle for the soul of IT". what a crock of shit.
they only require fee's in the event your audence is greater then 100,000 people, and even then it's only $2,500pa. i'd suggest if you are distributing a video to over 100,000 people your making money out of it and your a moron if it's making you less then $2,500pa.
The issue isn't that theora isn't avalible on browsers (thanks for tackeling a total non issue) it's that the big providers like youtube are only going with h.264 as far as they have announced. speculate all you want but your a fool if you make decisions based on such speculation as googles work with vp8
firefox only has 30% of the market at best, and people will very quickly change once they see they can't play the lastest HD content with it.
H.264 and jpeg are vastly different situations though - the licensing terms on H.264 are so forgiving and the technology so good.
you could come up with 100 paranoid hypotheatical's showing how the evil mpeg group could trap us, but i say IF that happens (didn't happen with any of their other techologies) THEN we look at an alternative.
theora's technology is not as good, and it's got virtually no support. let it go.
this is it's a massive fail when people try to mix their morals with their software. what software i use isn't a moral issue, it's a technical one.
i'm sure the hardcore OSS crowd won't listen as usually, and will happily continue to hang onto their 2% market share, year of the linux desktop this year and all that....
yes. I dropped a contractor here due to under performance this year. any project manager worth their salt will make sure the contract agreement has termination clauses for failure to meet deadlines, and i'd suggest 7 YEARS qualifies as failure.
in house vs contract both have their place (contract is good for one off projects where you don't want to have to keep extra staff employeed past the life of the project), that's not the debate here. the question is why is the city still paying? you can't possibly blame this on the contractor, they are merely running their business, it's up to the government to cut them off.
no he is correct about unions, they essentially protect the useless and incompertent purly because they paid their union dues. ironically unions often claim to be all about safety when they knowingly fight to keep unsafe workers in a job, and believe me most work place accidents are caused by co workers without 2 brain cells to rub together.
you completely misunderstand the concept on such a staggering scale i can hardly reply.
this is a CLASSIC example of why government is incompetent and corrupt, it has nothing to do with wether the job is being done by government employee's or a contractor. a government bureaucrat is the manager of this project, if this project is 7 years late the axe falls squarely on him, not the contractors he's allowed to milk the public purse. the government has bungled this by allowing it to continue, if this was a project being run at any private enterprise it'd have been shit canned years ago.
anyone going after BSD would need to go after one of the finest law schools in america, with almost unlimited grad and post grad students available to do research work and law professors as well as other practising lawyers working at virtually nil cost to the university.
sounds frightening doesn't it? hence the reason SCO didn't even think about attacking BSD, and instead went after linux users like IBM, because IBM was soft in comparision even though i believe there is a quote from IBM somewhere that states they will "turn the skies over utha black with lawyers" before they let SCO win.
I think you american's are all subconsiously hung up on it due to the use of the word "color".
instead of beating off about slippery slopes and other strawman nonsense, lets examine the issue at hand - will curing a persons colour blindness result in an improvement in their quality of life? pros: are they can get a job working as an electrician (orange brown blindness prevents you), they can apprechiate the full range of colours like every else.
your fucking mad. I have perfect sight but my sister in law had terrible sight until LASIK, she swears by it and i can definately see an improvement in her quality of life because of it.
Slashdot Mirror
i agree it's stupid to try ban everything that might distract drivers, but unfortunately we have lots of stupid people so we need to take out as many oppertunities to do stupid things as possible. i strongly think smoking while driving is a major problem. i know people who have been in serious accidents because they were trying to light a cig or dropped one in their lap.
are you retarded enough to suggest just because we can't ban all possible distractions, we should just let drivers do dangerous shit like text while driving? this sounds like the same logic as "condoms are only 99% effective so lets not bother with them!".
that thing has been dead for years. Which is a huge pity because solaris and sun's hardware was some sweet gear.
for a start, marriage used to be done for policial and wealth gains, and you kept a lover on the side (atleast one) for sexual gratification. this was the normal mode of operation during the victorian era of insane sexual repression, and i doubt it "improved" in the 20th century. the sexual revolution of the 60's was really all about bringing to the fore what everyone had been doing since forever. it was a revolt against the hear no evil speak no evil attitude of the 50's.
do you know WHY we have monogomy and stupid virginity pledges? because back in the day before the pill, condoms and paternatiy tests, the only way you could be SURE your wife's offspring was actually your own was if she was a virgin when you met and that she slept with no one else. after all you want your own genetic code to multiply and recieve the benefits of your hardwork.
all this crap about no sex before marriage and only having one sexual partner stems from this hangover from history.
oh and i highly doubt 20,000 people have been sued in the last week in a DC court. courts take months to process even a single straight forward claim.
hedonism is the pursuit of everything in EXCESS. having sex is just normal not in anyway an excess.
narcissism is a far more extreme psyhcological condition then just being horny and acting on it. that'd be like calling someone narcissistic just because they took the last coke out of the fridge.
This idea that we somehow have more sex now then in the past is the biggest load of bullcrap. guess what? people fuck, your grandma had he same urges in the 1920's as you have now. the biological drive is exactly the same, it's just socially we are less afraid to express it, so you hear about it more.
the idea that teenagers won't fuck is laughable.
they give advice like telling the bully to stop. like that's going to do fuck all. if they aren't listening to your gurgled screams of STOP STOP after the first 5 toilet flushings, more of the same won't help. These programs each the kids if telling the bully to stop doesn't work, tell a teacher or parent, who are pretty much useless at doing anything.
the only real solution for kids being bullied is to grow enough confidence to make bullying them no longer fun. no in school course is going to give them that. they usually these people just suffer throuhg highschool then get out in the real world where life experience teachs them how to cope.
good point. they should have to prove you seeded 100% of the file before your guilty of infringement.
If you want to argue ethics, lets debate about movie producers and actors with net worths in the 100's of millions sueing single mothers and college kids for downloading a few movies they otherwise wouldn't pay to see anyway.
What makes the problem greater these days is that attacking someone through a website lacks the human feed back. it doesn't feel like a person you attacking it's a faceless computer. a recent study of road rage showed the reason people get so angry at other people on the road is because their anger is directed at a car not a person. when the people driving could see the other persons face, they were much more forgiving. we look at the other person's face for emotional reactions, when we can't see that we feel ok with saying stuff we'd NEVER say to another persons face.
the scary thing about it is this is the same reason psychopaths are able to violently murder people and feel nothing. the inability to empathize.
this idea that linux is somehow got them worried is just the linux crowd beating off, it's even more obvious with titles like "the battle for the soul of IT". what a crock of shit.
seriously wtf else is sony going to do? if they do nothing and the next hack is a serious one everyone will point the finger at how they did nothing.
how are we sure it's gravity producing the lensing effect and not some other force?
looks photoshopped to me
they only require fee's in the event your audence is greater then 100,000 people, and even then it's only $2,500pa. i'd suggest if you are distributing a video to over 100,000 people your making money out of it and your a moron if it's making you less then $2,500pa.
firefox only has 30% of the market at best, and people will very quickly change once they see they can't play the lastest HD content with it.
you could come up with 100 paranoid hypotheatical's showing how the evil mpeg group could trap us, but i say IF that happens (didn't happen with any of their other techologies) THEN we look at an alternative.
theora's technology is not as good, and it's got virtually no support. let it go.
i'm sure the hardcore OSS crowd won't listen as usually, and will happily continue to hang onto their 2% market share, year of the linux desktop this year and all that....
in house vs contract both have their place (contract is good for one off projects where you don't want to have to keep extra staff employeed past the life of the project), that's not the debate here. the question is why is the city still paying? you can't possibly blame this on the contractor, they are merely running their business, it's up to the government to cut them off.
no he is correct about unions, they essentially protect the useless and incompertent purly because they paid their union dues. ironically unions often claim to be all about safety when they knowingly fight to keep unsafe workers in a job, and believe me most work place accidents are caused by co workers without 2 brain cells to rub together.
this is a CLASSIC example of why government is incompetent and corrupt, it has nothing to do with wether the job is being done by government employee's or a contractor. a government bureaucrat is the manager of this project, if this project is 7 years late the axe falls squarely on him, not the contractors he's allowed to milk the public purse. the government has bungled this by allowing it to continue, if this was a project being run at any private enterprise it'd have been shit canned years ago.
sounds frightening doesn't it? hence the reason SCO didn't even think about attacking BSD, and instead went after linux users like IBM, because IBM was soft in comparision even though i believe there is a quote from IBM somewhere that states they will "turn the skies over utha black with lawyers" before they let SCO win.
it hasn't bothered the monkeys. this is what clinical trials are all about, and it's not a reason not to proceed.
instead of beating off about slippery slopes and other strawman nonsense, lets examine the issue at hand - will curing a persons colour blindness result in an improvement in their quality of life? pros: are they can get a job working as an electrician (orange brown blindness prevents you), they can apprechiate the full range of colours like every else.
cons: ...........?
when the time comes, i'll definately get it.