The government does not "release" money. There is no great big vault with money waiting in the wings. What happens is they appropriate money from the citizenry, keep a portion for things they won't tell you about and then graciously allow some of it back to citizens (and non) who typically weren't the ones who paid in.
This money cannot stimulate the economy because it is a net loss.
Can anyone who can type in the English language form a coherent analogy? No. Your analogy is ridiculous and you probably knew that as you typed it.
I was in IT my entire career. The computer I'm typing on now I purchased for home use - gaming and writing.
I plugged it, it found the wireless and connected and it was off and running with almost no crap needed by me. Would have worked the same way for my daughter who doesn't have any IT.
Explain in coherent terms why this is a bad thing.
Ethics are perforce abstract. They are something you reach for, not an absolute without contexts.
For instance, if your ethics tell you to help others eat, that in no way means you need starve to do it.
"there's a fixed amount of surface area, a limited amount of solar energy"
And you just demonstrated Malthus' problem with not being able to prognose. Float not only those solar accumulators in interplanetary space and beam the energy back, but greenhouses as well. No footprint limitation and the entire planet can be turned into a park.
But you have to get there. Ludditism makes that more difficult.
"research so far suggests it's the heated tail, not the flagging motion"
The rattlesnake is a pit viper. IR is it's targeting flag. Holy shit, every herpetologist in the damned world knows this. Hell, every biologist in the world. Every fucking kid who likes snakes.
"Research" like this is only proving the known with an empirical test. Worthwhile in the textbook sense that some other animal has evolved a mechanism to defeat it, worthless as news concerning the snake.
What's your point? That's not what happened to her. A *parent* of a child at the school was a friend of hers. That non-employed-by-school parent made the complaint. Are you suggesting she was negligent because she didn't poll everyone and unfriend those with children at the school?
Someone you have as a friend on FB could have a connection to your employer that you are unaware of.
To equate an eight year old level joke with working as a stripper is a tad far, m'thinks.
Those in charge used the complaint of an obviously corn cob impaired parent as an excuse. Any other rationale is bullshit.
Yes, school employees are required to maintain certain social standards through contract. If and only if she had a contract that explicitly stated she must friend the school somehow is this request and resultant action feasibly ethical. Even then, IQ needs to be applied to the selection criteria for importance of pursuit.
And I, as a father, would reject any attempts by a teacher to develop a 'social' network of any kind that I did not say OK to, and I'm not going to (well, wouldn't have).
The reason is that schooling is not part and parcel to every moment of a child's life. Just as with work, there needs to be down time. It's not the teacher's job to be my kid's "pal".
Kids are greatly influenced by the ideas of their "pals". I wanted my kid school aged kid influenced by her peers, not an adult other than me and my friends. Then as now, adults just couldn't keep politics out of other people's faces.
Slashdot Mirror
The government does not "release" money. There is no great big vault with money waiting in the wings. What happens is they appropriate money from the citizenry, keep a portion for things they won't tell you about and then graciously allow some of it back to citizens (and non) who typically weren't the ones who paid in.
This money cannot stimulate the economy because it is a net loss.
Myst - in a large nut shell. Horrid game. Remember the "prize" for completion?
The Drowned Gods - even worse.
And, like people who rely on Google directions, you shove that spade through a gas line and go up in a ball of fire.
Don't rely on tools to think for you.
"Well to joe public, the white lab coats are just copying and pasting code and doing only enough testing to make it appear safe."
Then they're uneducated about it. Some of them still think the world's flat, you know.
Can anyone who can type in the English language form a coherent analogy? No. Your analogy is ridiculous and you probably knew that as you typed it.
I was in IT my entire career. The computer I'm typing on now I purchased for home use - gaming and writing.
I plugged it, it found the wireless and connected and it was off and running with almost no crap needed by me. Would have worked the same way for my daughter who doesn't have any IT.
Explain in coherent terms why this is a bad thing.
Remember, all this is based on the "researcher's" interpretation and "intuitive" guessing as to people's motivations. In other words - horseshit.
Opinion only. Passwords are highly overrated.
They not only pay a greater amount of money in taxes, but a greater percentage in taxes than you do jackass. Either pony up to their level or STFU.
We've seen the elite in charge recently.
They are not as you describe.
Ethics are perforce abstract. They are something you reach for, not an absolute without contexts. For instance, if your ethics tell you to help others eat, that in no way means you need starve to do it.
Shooting the shit out of your example.
"there's a fixed amount of surface area, a limited amount of solar energy"
And you just demonstrated Malthus' problem with not being able to prognose. Float not only those solar accumulators in interplanetary space and beam the energy back, but greenhouses as well. No footprint limitation and the entire planet can be turned into a park.
But you have to get there. Ludditism makes that more difficult.
I'd rather hear that from Google, Amazon, YouTube and a host of other folks doing some *real* computing.
Dude(tte), I'm a known, strident atheist and - you are lying about Christians.
Period.
Not only lying; but wildly and shamefully, because I'd put solid money on your *knowing* what you wrote was a lie.
"research so far suggests it's the heated tail, not the flagging motion"
The rattlesnake is a pit viper. IR is it's targeting flag. Holy shit, every herpetologist in the damned world knows this. Hell, every biologist in the world. Every fucking kid who likes snakes.
"Research" like this is only proving the known with an empirical test. Worthwhile in the textbook sense that some other animal has evolved a mechanism to defeat it, worthless as news concerning the snake.
Actually, the header is ambiguous with 'unlikely' being closer to 'credit card' than 'details'.
Microsoft: Credit info lifting from XBox 360s is unlikely - is more clear.
All of which can be done later because you *ARE GOING* to rewrite and edit your notes unless ego prevents.
Never runs out of juice.
"A parent and Facebook friend of Hester's"
Article does not say if the student was one of hers or not.
What's your point? That's not what happened to her. A *parent* of a child at the school was a friend of hers. That non-employed-by-school parent made the complaint. Are you suggesting she was negligent because she didn't poll everyone and unfriend those with children at the school?
Someone you have as a friend on FB could have a connection to your employer that you are unaware of.
To equate an eight year old level joke with working as a stripper is a tad far, m'thinks.
Those in charge used the complaint of an obviously corn cob impaired parent as an excuse. Any other rationale is bullshit.
Yes, school employees are required to maintain certain social standards through contract. If and only if she had a contract that explicitly stated she must friend the school somehow is this request and resultant action feasibly ethical. Even then, IQ needs to be applied to the selection criteria for importance of pursuit.
School fucked up.
And I, as a father, would reject any attempts by a teacher to develop a 'social' network of any kind that I did not say OK to, and I'm not going to (well, wouldn't have).
The reason is that schooling is not part and parcel to every moment of a child's life. Just as with work, there needs to be down time. It's not the teacher's job to be my kid's "pal".
Kids are greatly influenced by the ideas of their "pals". I wanted my kid school aged kid influenced by her peers, not an adult other than me and my friends. Then as now, adults just couldn't keep politics out of other people's faces.
A relationship between two adults is relevant to a post about a teacher of children how?
I'll bite. He's not religious. What church? If that was meant to be obtusely sly, it's too much so.
"... your only resort is to tell the absolute truth (something we generally try to avoid in truly social situations) ..."
Don't avoid it. Bask in it. Doing so up front will eliminate the nasty scene where you finally *have* to because they won't take no for an answer.
"I don't think you get it. This is made exactly for you, in a way you will like it."
We get it. You don't. Or you're trolling. Don't include me in your fake social networks - period.
And, dude/dudette - don't use advertising copy. It flags you as a troll immediately.
"Someone shares their photos with you..."
Then send me the pic. or upload it to a public site and try not to bullshit me about these profiles being safe.
PS: Ffuck you on your mind-reading capabilities.