Conservative, Republican and you can lump the Tories in there for good measure too. Not as bad as the Republicans IMO, but you know that's like hailing a turd for being the least smelly in the park.
Besides being delusional, and opposed to freedom? It's right there on the tin, conservatives want to legislate morality, which never works and which always harms people who aren't harming anyone.
I'd argue you're describing Conservatives/Republicans i.e. regressive moralizing asshats rather than "small c" conservatives, i.e. people generally opposed to change.
I'm not one. And all political organisations going under the guise of conservatives are delusional, anti freedom arseholes who indeed want to legislate their very paricular form of morality.
The "funniest" are those who call themselves conservative Christians. I claim no such thing exists. You cannot (a) be a conservative and (b) follow the teachings of arguably the most famous radical of all time.
Put some teeth into the "under penalty of perjury"
It does have teeth, it just doesn't mean what you think it means because it's a rider attached to a really really astoundingly stupid clause.
IIRC, the clause is that it's perjery if you don't represent the copyright holder making the claim. So, if you as an agent of Sony make a DMCA claim against the moon landings, that's 100% legal because you do, in fact, represent Sony.
If however you file a DMCA on behalf of Sony when you don't represent them then that is perjery.
Filing illigitimate claims for a copyright holder you do represent isn't the subject of that clause, so the "under penalty of perjery" doesn't apply.
The electoral college is the only thing standing in the way of California and New York making all our choices for us.
So instead we should have sparsley populated states making all the choices for us. You know because liberals are basically worth half a person so their votes should count for less anyway.
And good luck convincing the myriad small flyover states that what's wrong with the country is the concrete canyons of the coast don't have enough power and control to do the things they hate.
I sometimes forget: people on the coasts are worth less than wholesome middle Americans because (a) they live on the coast and (b) live closer together. So, their votes should count for less too.
I notice that all the sponsors are democrats. So what clause in the bill preserves the right of the dead to vote.
I love how the die hard Republicans (note I didn't say conservatives) love to accuse the Democrat pary of voter fraud. But it's the Republican party that goes in for it on industrial scale with massive Gerrymandering.
There's nothing wrong with being conservative, but these days if you support the Republican party you're basically a bastard.
Neutrality is about not throttling based on the destination, not QoS. It's fine to give VOIP traffic higher priority than bulk downloads. It's not fine to give Verizon VOIP traffic higher priority than skype.
And what kind of fucking corporate arsewipe thinks it's somehow acceptable by any moral or civil standards to gouge the fire department in the middle of a serious crisis.
The shit will hit the fan, and the Tech Left will loose out. That's right folks regulation is coming, you cannot shadow ban all the republicans on Twitter, without it blowing up in your face.
So what you appear to be implying is that Republicans love busines free to roam unfettered with only "light touch" regulation (that's what they claim after all) until that happens to affect them personally at which point, regulate the crap out of the businesses.
Self righteous name calling; classic moral panic behavior.
Yeah it's such a moral panic to call those people with swastika tattoos---who like chanting "blood and soil" and complain endlessly about "the jews"---Nazis.
Realistically, I can take any socialized health care system and point out to a way that it's inferior to the US system.
So for every system in the world you can find one area of US healthcare which is at least marginally better. Nonetheless that would handily avoid all the areas where it's much worse.
The US system is expensive, but also
But nothing. The outcomes are at best comparable (US does well at cancer in particular) but often much worse (the US is awful at infant mortality) than other third world countries.
but also very available
Only if you can afford it.
It may bankrupt you, but you can choose to do it if you want.
Not after you're bankrupt you can't. If it's not complete by then, you're both ill and destitute.
I had friends who were told they were allowed one round of chemo and that was it under the UK system
Simple laws of supply and demand tell us that if there really is a shortage, then we should be seeing salaries jump.
That only works if the worker market is efficient. Workers and jobs aren't infinitely fungible, people will only work within some distance of their home and are reluctant to move. Secondly never bet against stupid budgeting decisions and the ability of management to act irrationally.
Typical Maskiki-ism: the words on the page you "read" and what comes out of your brain are linked only in the most tenuous sense.
For the information of anyone else reading (not you Mashiki: you're utterly impervious to facts) what they actually say is they're not providing support when NoScript is installed since it's causing too many problems.
And how on earth you think htat has anything to do with whether firefox uses threads is anyones guess. Not that anyone would want to guess!
You prefer get dressed well which ultimately means you prefer her in Prada over Wal-Mart. I mean sure you don't care about the specific brand, but you do care about something which does have in many cases a correlation with more expensive brands.
No it doesn't. You asked if it was rational for him to repair it. I claim it is. Doesn't mean it's rational for everyone. Maximising money isn't rational if you don't care all that much about the stuff. I don't think you should be down modded for a perfectly reasonable discussion point, but welcome to slashdot, eh.
In my experience, that's what almost everyone does, except that with larger families "leave for ages" just means "want to put a normal week's worth of clothes through within a single free day at the weekend".
I don't have a large family, but that's precisely what I do, which is at least an improvement over what I used to do. I used to live in an apartment with 3 washing machines and two of those colossal dryers.
Then I really could leave it for absolutely ages. There's a certain efficiency to be had by having all the machines running simultenaously for three complete cycles.
Well good for you and good for the environment, but is it useful for anything more than an anecdote? I'm not saying it to be rude, but if you put a dollar value on your time and factor in the time you took inspecting it, the odds that it would work and that even though you expanded the life span you probably didn't give it another 20 years was it rational?
Humans don't on the whole care nearly as much about money as they think they do. We're certainly not rational machines who would substitute the weekend tinkering fixing an old alarm clock for an equal amount of time spent earning money so we could buy a new clock and have some left over money.
That's not how people work, so yes, I'd say his actions were as rational as any other.
...under conditions that will apply to almost no-one, because people have jobs and families and other major commitments, and they can't wait 3-4 hours for every load of washing to complete.
Well they should just put them on last thing at night like I do and then set it drying in the morning. No problem.
Just kidding!
What I actually do is leave the laundry for ages then do tons in one day on the quick wash cycle.
Slashdot Mirror
Conservative, Republican and you can lump the Tories in there for good measure too. Not as bad as the Republicans IMO, but you know that's like hailing a turd for being the least smelly in the park.
Besides being delusional, and opposed to freedom? It's right there on the tin, conservatives want to legislate morality, which never works and which always harms people who aren't harming anyone.
I'd argue you're describing Conservatives/Republicans i.e. regressive moralizing asshats rather than "small c" conservatives, i.e. people generally opposed to change.
I'm not one. And all political organisations going under the guise of conservatives are delusional, anti freedom arseholes who indeed want to legislate their very paricular form of morality.
The "funniest" are those who call themselves conservative Christians. I claim no such thing exists. You cannot (a) be a conservative and (b) follow the teachings of arguably the most famous radical of all time.
By using the Facebook MRI Scanning Technology, you agree that your MRI scan will be posted to your Timeline once the scan is complete.
Got cancer :(
[37 people liked this]
Put some teeth into the "under penalty of perjury"
It does have teeth, it just doesn't mean what you think it means because it's a rider attached to a really really astoundingly stupid clause.
IIRC, the clause is that it's perjery if you don't represent the copyright holder making the claim. So, if you as an agent of Sony make a DMCA claim against the moon landings, that's 100% legal because you do, in fact, represent Sony.
If however you file a DMCA on behalf of Sony when you don't represent them then that is perjery.
Filing illigitimate claims for a copyright holder you do represent isn't the subject of that clause, so the "under penalty of perjery" doesn't apply.
There is no such thing as 'Fake News'.
Yes there is, it's lies masquerading as news stories. So it looks like news but isn't really news. I.e. its fake news.
Words mean things you know. And it's almost like you can deduce the meaning of collections of words by analysing their combination.
Yahoo! is egregiously bad.
It's yahoo though, so who the fuck cares? The two people who visited yesterday?
The electoral college is the only thing standing in the way of California and New York making all our choices for us.
So instead we should have sparsley populated states making all the choices for us. You know because liberals are basically worth half a person so their votes should count for less anyway.
And good luck convincing the myriad small flyover states that what's wrong with the country is the concrete canyons of the coast don't have enough power and control to do the things they hate.
I sometimes forget: people on the coasts are worth less than wholesome middle Americans because (a) they live on the coast and (b) live closer together. So, their votes should count for less too.
I notice that all the sponsors are democrats. So what clause in the bill preserves the right of the dead to vote.
I love how the die hard Republicans (note I didn't say conservatives) love to accuse the Democrat pary of voter fraud. But it's the Republican party that goes in for it on industrial scale with massive Gerrymandering.
There's nothing wrong with being conservative, but these days if you support the Republican party you're basically a bastard.
Nice muddying of the issue, but no.
Neutrality is about not throttling based on the destination, not QoS. It's fine to give VOIP traffic higher priority than bulk downloads. It's not fine to give Verizon VOIP traffic higher priority than skype.
And what kind of fucking corporate arsewipe thinks it's somehow acceptable by any moral or civil standards to gouge the fire department in the middle of a serious crisis.
The shit will hit the fan, and the Tech Left will loose out. That's right folks regulation is coming, you cannot shadow ban all the republicans on Twitter, without it blowing up in your face.
So what you appear to be implying is that Republicans love busines free to roam unfettered with only "light touch" regulation (that's what they claim after all) until that happens to affect them personally at which point, regulate the crap out of the businesses.
Self righteous name calling; classic moral panic behavior.
Yeah it's such a moral panic to call those people with swastika tattoos---who like chanting "blood and soil" and complain endlessly about "the jews"---Nazis.
They're not Nazis they're very naughty boys.
Insults are not arguments. I'll bet you're a liberal - because insults are all they have.
That's beautiful.
If you want a plural meaning, using a plural noun. THOSE PLAYERS are winning.
Those datas are bad?
Realistically, I can take any socialized health care system and point out to a way that it's inferior to the US system.
So for every system in the world you can find one area of US healthcare which is at least marginally better. Nonetheless that would handily avoid all the areas where it's much worse.
The US system is expensive, but also
But nothing. The outcomes are at best comparable (US does well at cancer in particular) but often much worse (the US is awful at infant mortality) than other third world countries.
but also very available
Only if you can afford it.
It may bankrupt you, but you can choose to do it if you want.
Not after you're bankrupt you can't. If it's not complete by then, you're both ill and destitute.
I had friends who were told they were allowed one round of chemo and that was it under the UK system
Bullshit.
Can't blame Amazon for taking the incentives offered to them.
Yep can't blame arseholes for being arseholes because they did it for money. That justifies everything!
Nice try but no cigar. The post has a couple of random users saying it's blacklisted. Here you go form the horse's mouth:
https://forum.palemoon.org/vie...
(also note how I linked to not just the page but the post).
You can lead an idiot to knowledge, but you can't make them smarter.
Touche, my man, touche!
Why do people assume that self-driving cars will EVER exist?
Because humans are on average shitty drivers and there's nothing magical about driving that makes it perfectly possible for a human but not a machine.
Simple laws of supply and demand tell us that if there really is a shortage, then we should be seeing salaries jump.
That only works if the worker market is efficient. Workers and jobs aren't infinitely fungible, people will only work within some distance of their home and are reluctant to move. Secondly never bet against stupid budgeting decisions and the ability of management to act irrationally.
Typical Maskiki-ism: the words on the page you "read" and what comes out of your brain are linked only in the most tenuous sense.
For the information of anyone else reading (not you Mashiki: you're utterly impervious to facts) what they actually say is they're not providing support when NoScript is installed since it's causing too many problems.
And how on earth you think htat has anything to do with whether firefox uses threads is anyones guess. Not that anyone would want to guess!
You prefer get dressed well which ultimately means you prefer her in Prada over Wal-Mart. I mean sure you don't care about the specific brand, but you do care about something which does have in many cases a correlation with more expensive brands.
No it doesn't. You asked if it was rational for him to repair it. I claim it is. Doesn't mean it's rational for everyone. Maximising money isn't rational if you don't care all that much about the stuff. I don't think you should be down modded for a perfectly reasonable discussion point, but welcome to slashdot, eh.
In my experience, that's what almost everyone does, except that with larger families "leave for ages" just means "want to put a normal week's worth of clothes through within a single free day at the weekend".
I don't have a large family, but that's precisely what I do, which is at least an improvement over what I used to do. I used to live in an apartment with 3 washing machines and two of those colossal dryers.
Then I really could leave it for absolutely ages. There's a certain efficiency to be had by having all the machines running simultenaously for three complete cycles.
Well good for you and good for the environment, but is it useful for anything more than an anecdote? I'm not saying it to be rude, but if you put a dollar value on your time and factor in the time you took inspecting it, the odds that it would work and that even though you expanded the life span you probably didn't give it another 20 years was it rational?
Humans don't on the whole care nearly as much about money as they think they do. We're certainly not rational machines who would substitute the weekend tinkering fixing an old alarm clock for an equal amount of time spent earning money so we could buy a new clock and have some left over money.
That's not how people work, so yes, I'd say his actions were as rational as any other.
...under conditions that will apply to almost no-one, because people have jobs and families and other major commitments, and they can't wait 3-4 hours for every load of washing to complete.
Well they should just put them on last thing at night like I do and then set it drying in the morning. No problem.
Just kidding!
What I actually do is leave the laundry for ages then do tons in one day on the quick wash cycle.