such children will a) have to be floating around on the South Pacific and b) have to ignore the range warnings.
So, we have to keep Our Children [Patent Pending] off most of the planet's surface ? If this thing is going into orbit then what 'range' do we have to avoid? I support private space ventures, I really do. I just don't think our society is ready for it and someone IS going to get sued. Sad, but likely true.
while I have been waiting most of my life to see private space ventures get off the ground [no pun intended] I fear that we will see rapid and oppressive over-regulation within seconds of the first pieces of a failed launch showering down on 'The Children' [TM].
no, I WAS being funny, you just seem to be too uptight aboot yourself as a Canadian to get it [I'm assuming you are Canadian, my apologies if I'm wrong, Gord].
..start a political battle by making fun of Canada..
I'd start with the accent before I talked smack aboot your Loonies & Two-nies...
Blah, blah, blah..."attacking other countries and stealing their oil...
Yep: really, really uptight... Catch a clue, Gordo, if we were stealing it we would not be paying money for it. If your theory was correct we would be attacking CANADA [#1 on US oil import list : http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_ publications/company_level_imports/current/import. html ] to get the most bang for the greenback. My apolologies for introducing facts into your delusional world but we get >3.9 million barrels per day from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela compared to 450,000 from Iraq, which is 2/3 the amount we imported from them in'04 [see same link].
The lame-ass idea that Iraq is about oil is really just pathetic. If you don't like George just sack up and say so, you don't need to make up silly shit just to make yourself feel better for being so full of hate. I don't like the guy either but I'll stand up and say its because of [what I view are] his oppresive consevative/religeous views and the fact that he not attacking the global terrorist networks hard enough.
I don't think US workers share your views on the Canadian Dollar
Wake up and smell the Tim Horton's - I am a US Worker (tm) and so is everyone I know who has a job. We all laugh at the Canadian Dollar, we chuckle at the Canadian economic system and we bust a gut out loud at the Canadian Healthcare system [funny how more Canadians get MRIs in Buffalo than in Toronto...]. We only smile bemusedly at Canadians in general because you were English more recently than we were - its not your fault.
Last time I checked, about 50% of Hollywood movies are filmed in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal because of the exchange rate - meaning less work for them.
Your point illustrates why I and my fellow NASCAR-loving, oil-stealing, two-time-george-bush-electing US Workers (tm) view Canadians as our comfortably familiar yet just a bit more than odd, lead-paint eating cousins: THEY ARE GOING THERE BECAUSE YOUR ECONOMY SUCKS JUST A LITTLE MORE THAN OURS SO YOU ARE CHEAP LABOR!. That, and full nudity at the strip clubs. And the beer. And hockey. F*ck the beaver, but moose are pretty cool...
and big.
So, anyway, you humorless Newfie, that was the joke: your economy sucks just a little bit more than ours so $20 from a Canadian would not cover the cost of the Legal Lubricant she will need... Get it now?
Now you got me all worked up - I'm gonna get a bunch of my militia buddies together and go squeeze a few more gallons of crude out of Afghanistan...
Solar flares/sun spot activity fluctuate on a roughly 11 year cycle - it never completely dies down and is always better and worse than it was in previous years [depending on what part of the cycle is 'the good old days' to you].
It is sort of like the crap that comes out of Jesse Jackson's mouth - its always something ignorant, but once in a while its just over the top...
...but that may well be the OP's problem [as it is in my case] - the manager in question has no clue whatsoever. I do not see how one can properly manage a technical resource if one does not understand [even to a minor degree] that technology.
In otherwords, I don't expect the average driver [the manager of the vehicular resource] to be able to refine petroleum on the spot but I do expect him/her to understand that gas is required to make the engine run [and know the exceptions to the rule, as well].
The average company would do well to understand that given the economic times we live in that a clueless manager wastes far more of your assets by merely being clueless [and therefore unable to make timely/wise decisions regarding deployment/purchasing of technical assets] than that support FTE you are eye-balling for getting the axe.
"...I believe that God exists. There are other possibilites but I've deliberately chosen to push them aside..."
Right, so you are accepting the premise up front and ignoring the possibilties. That is what separates science from blind belief.
"...Most Christians consider this to be acceptable, because their belief in God isn't dependent on facts, but as far as I know science doesn't operate on raw faith."
Which is EXACTLY the reason why "ID" should not be passed off as science: it is clearly an attempt to insert 'belief' into a place that should be teaching science [pursuit of fact via recursive investigation rather than just getting the warm-and-fuzzy over a well delivered sermon and calling it a day].
...and society in the days of the OT/Garden of Eden/ all-of-humanity-springing-forth-from-one-woman-who -would-have-had-to-have-sex-with-her-own-children- for-Genesis-to-be-true was somehow NOT fucked up?
"...And yet, somehow, the same people who criticise those with religious beliefs for believing in a deity that they've never personally seen or talked to are perfectly comfortable in accepting that the Big Bang took place without knowing or caring what caused it..."
I have always used this arguement in the other direction: How can a Theist accept the existence of an unseen, undetectable 'creator' while trying to discredit the BB theory as something unprovable [what came before the BB, then? Huh? what "caused" it, Mr. "Scientist"...?]. The difference, of course, is that the BB should be viewed as a theory [a work in progress: maybe we will find a way to answer the question or maybe we won't, but at the moment the best evidence points in this direction, etc...] while belief in the 'creator' is accepted up front with no possibility for there being another explanation. A hard-core theist will try to discredit the BB theory of the beginning of the universe by pointing to the lack of a cause but they blindly accept the creation of the universe by a devine force that just popped up from nowhere.
If the universe was created by a devine being where did that being come from? For god to have created the universe ['everything'] it would have to come from outside the universe ['nothingness']. How can a Theist claim this is possible while at the same time say the BB theory is crap because the universe could not suddenly spark into being out of nothingness? This should be the poster child for lame logic.
For the record, I don't hold much 'belief' in either theory. We do, however, have many observations, measurements, etc. that point to things happening that are described by the BB theory. We see nothing at all to support the idea of an alien lifeform/diety flipping a switch...
...along with a small laser imbedded in the monitor that will burn out your retinas if you try to access blocked content more than once within a preset [by someone else..] time...
I have avoided two major accidents in my life by punching the gas to squeeze through a shrinking car/car or car/wall gap. If I was already doing the speed limit [which I was in both cases] and the vehicle was prevented from executing a sudden and dramitic increase in velocity I would have been caught in both resulting in unknown injuries [one of those accidents I avoided did have fatalities...].
The lack of this abiltiy may not have 'caused' the accident, which was the thrust of your question, but in both case I was clearly not part of the ongoing accidents because I was able to immediately accelerate and avoid them [I really miss that car....].
This idea sucks ass.
"In fact, no standard monitor has been made in over a decade that has the potential for burn in..."
If the HP monitors I am replacing by the cartload could talk they would call you a liar.
Nothing personal - just sayin'...
HP LCDs, on the other hand, don't seem to remain operational long enough to to be in danger of burn in.
[note for the humor impaired: I know its different technology - it was just a slam on HPs complete shit 1510/1520 series...]
Your final point supports the argument that the problem lies with the vendor of the OS - whether we are talking about a dumb patch being installed by bypassing the installer OS checks or if we are discussing why the OS allows systems files to be blindly overidden in this manner the point is really the same.
The argument that other systems have this flaw does not make the point invalid - it only included them in the general blame. If the problem exists in all operatings systems it makes more sense to correct the problem in all of them rather than ignore the problem because others have it as well.
The fact that you could do as you suggest only tells me that the entire file management system and patch process needs to be overhauled on all operating systems.
Slashdot Mirror
42% of all the people I asked in the last 5 minutes agree with you, the other 73% don't...
= : ^ ) >
but they can still track you by the tag they hid on the outside surface of the tape...
such children will a) have to be floating around on the South Pacific and b) have to ignore the range warnings.
So, we have to keep Our Children [Patent Pending] off most of the planet's surface ? If this thing is going into orbit then what 'range' do we have to avoid? I support private space ventures, I really do. I just don't think our society is ready for it and someone IS going to get sued. Sad, but likely true.
fairly immune to public scrutiny
while I have been waiting most of my life to see private space ventures get off the ground [no pun intended] I fear that we will see rapid and oppressive over-regulation within seconds of the first pieces of a failed launch showering down on 'The Children' [TM].
I know you're trying to be funny...
..start a political battle by making fun of Canada..
..."attacking other countries and stealing their oil...
_ publications/company_level_imports/current/import. html ] to get the most bang for the greenback. My apolologies for introducing facts into your delusional world but we get >3.9 million barrels per day from Canada, Mexico and Venezuela compared to 450,000 from Iraq, which is 2/3 the amount we imported from them in'04 [see same link].
no, I WAS being funny, you just seem to be too uptight aboot yourself as a Canadian to get it [I'm assuming you are Canadian, my apologies if I'm wrong, Gord].
I'd start with the accent before I talked smack aboot your Loonies & Two-nies...
Blah, blah, blah
Yep: really, really uptight... Catch a clue, Gordo, if we were stealing it we would not be paying money for it. If your theory was correct we would be attacking CANADA [#1 on US oil import list : http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data
The lame-ass idea that Iraq is about oil is really just pathetic. If you don't like George just sack up and say so, you don't need to make up silly shit just to make yourself feel better for being so full of hate. I don't like the guy either but I'll stand up and say its because of [what I view are] his oppresive consevative/religeous views and the fact that he not attacking the global terrorist networks hard enough.
I don't think US workers share your views on the Canadian Dollar
Wake up and smell the Tim Horton's - I am a US Worker (tm) and so is everyone I know who has a job. We all laugh at the Canadian Dollar, we chuckle at the Canadian economic system and we bust a gut out loud at the Canadian Healthcare system [funny how more Canadians get MRIs in Buffalo than in Toronto...]. We only smile bemusedly at Canadians in general because you were English more recently than we were - its not your fault.
Last time I checked, about 50% of Hollywood movies are filmed in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal because of the exchange rate - meaning less work for them.
Your point illustrates why I and my fellow NASCAR-loving, oil-stealing, two-time-george-bush-electing US Workers (tm) view Canadians as our comfortably familiar yet just a bit more than odd, lead-paint eating cousins: THEY ARE GOING THERE BECAUSE YOUR ECONOMY SUCKS JUST A LITTLE MORE THAN OURS SO YOU ARE CHEAP LABOR!. That, and full nudity at the strip clubs. And the beer. And hockey. F*ck the beaver, but moose are pretty cool...
and big.
So, anyway, you humorless Newfie, that was the joke: your economy sucks just a little bit more than ours so $20 from a Canadian would not cover the cost of the Legal Lubricant she will need...
Get it now?
Now you got me all worked up - I'm gonna get a bunch of my militia buddies together and go squeeze a few more gallons of crude out of Afghanistan...
$20 Canadian?..
Ha ha ha ha haha,
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha hehe hoho haha,
.
.
*sniff*
*sniff*
.
Ahahahaha, ha ha..
$20 Canadian won't cover the K-Y !
"..Paddywagons were driven by the Irish - they weren't carrying them.."
It was both...just sayin'...
= ; ^ ) >
~22,250 miles...
= : ^ \ >
so he can't be management...
Solar flares/sun spot activity fluctuate on a roughly 11 year cycle - it never completely dies down and is always better and worse than it was in previous years [depending on what part of the cycle is 'the good old days' to you].
It is sort of like the crap that comes out of Jesse Jackson's mouth - its always something ignorant, but once in a while its just over the top...
and next, in an effort to distract us from the truth they will eventually play the race ca...
oh, wait, my bad.
...but that may well be the OP's problem [as it is in my case] - the manager in question has no clue whatsoever. I do not see how one can properly manage a technical resource if one does not understand [even to a minor degree] that technology.
In otherwords, I don't expect the average driver [the manager of the vehicular resource] to be able to refine petroleum on the spot but I do expect him/her to understand that gas is required to make the engine run [and know the exceptions to the rule, as well].
The average company would do well to understand that given the economic times we live in that a clueless manager wastes far more of your assets by merely being clueless [and therefore unable to make timely/wise decisions regarding deployment/purchasing of technical assets] than that support FTE you are eye-balling for getting the axe.
"...I believe that God exists. There are other possibilites but I've deliberately chosen to push them aside..."
Right, so you are accepting the premise up front and ignoring the possibilties. That is what separates science from blind belief.
"...Most Christians consider this to be acceptable, because their belief in God isn't dependent on facts, but as far as I know science doesn't operate on raw faith."
Which is EXACTLY the reason why "ID" should not be passed off as science: it is clearly an attempt to insert 'belief' into a place that should be teaching science [pursuit of fact via recursive investigation rather than just getting the warm-and-fuzzy over a well delivered sermon and calling it a day].
= : ^ \ >
"...My question is, how do you know that the stories of Jesus are not just stories as well?..."
The answer is obvious: the Bible says so...
= : ^ / >
...and society in the days of the OT/Garden of Eden/ all-of-humanity-springing-forth-from-one-woman-who -would-have-had-to-have-sex-with-her-own-children- for-Genesis-to-be-true
was somehow NOT fucked up?
just saying...
= : ^ ) >
"...One time I threw a brick at a duck..."
Did you quack it?
= ; ^ 0 >
"...And yet, somehow, the same people who criticise those with religious beliefs for believing in a deity that they've never personally seen or talked to are perfectly comfortable in accepting that the Big Bang took place without knowing or caring what caused it..."
I have always used this arguement in the other direction: How can a Theist accept the existence of an unseen, undetectable 'creator' while trying to discredit the BB theory as something unprovable [what came before the BB, then? Huh? what "caused" it, Mr. "Scientist"...?]. The difference, of course, is that the BB should be viewed as a theory [a work in progress: maybe we will find a way to answer the question or maybe we won't, but at the moment the best evidence points in this direction, etc...] while belief in the 'creator' is accepted up front with no possibility for there being another explanation. A hard-core theist will try to discredit the BB theory of the beginning of the universe by pointing to the lack of a cause but they blindly accept the creation of the universe by a devine force that just popped up from nowhere.
If the universe was created by a devine being where did that being come from? For god to have created the universe ['everything'] it would have to come from outside the universe ['nothingness']. How can a Theist claim this is possible while at the same time say the BB theory is crap because the universe could not suddenly spark into being out of nothingness? This should be the poster child for lame logic.
For the record, I don't hold much 'belief' in either theory. We do, however, have many observations, measurements, etc. that point to things happening that are described by the BB theory. We see nothing at all to support the idea of an alien lifeform/diety flipping a switch...
= ; ^ ) >
...along with a small laser imbedded in the monitor that will burn out your retinas if you try to access blocked content more than once within a preset [by someone else..] time...
= : ^ ( >
You got it - we should all celebrate Freedom (tm) by dropping to our knees in front of Big Brother in compliance with his Speed Tax!
I have avoided two major accidents in my life by punching the gas to squeeze through a shrinking car/car or car/wall gap. If I was already doing the speed limit [which I was in both cases] and the vehicle was prevented from executing a sudden and dramitic increase in velocity I would have been caught in both resulting in unknown injuries [one of those accidents I avoided did have fatalities...]. The lack of this abiltiy may not have 'caused' the accident, which was the thrust of your question, but in both case I was clearly not part of the ongoing accidents because I was able to immediately accelerate and avoid them [I really miss that car....]. This idea sucks ass.
if it runs on Window$ we don't have to wait...
"We don't even have 50 cent pieces up here..."
Isn't a 'Looney' worth US$.50 ?...
= ; ^ ) >
Enough of this - you people have lead me down the wrong path...
= ; ^ ) >
"In fact, no standard monitor has been made in over a decade that has the potential for burn in..."
If the HP monitors I am replacing by the cartload could talk they would call you a liar.
Nothing personal - just sayin'...
HP LCDs, on the other hand, don't seem to remain operational long enough to to be in danger of burn in.
[note for the humor impaired: I know its different technology - it was just a slam on HPs complete shit 1510/1520 series...]
= : ^ \ >
"...Tell ya what..."
Your final point supports the argument that the problem lies with the vendor of the OS - whether we are talking about a dumb patch being installed by bypassing the installer OS checks or if we are discussing why the OS allows systems files to be blindly overidden in this manner the point is really the same.
The argument that other systems have this flaw does not make the point invalid - it only included them in the general blame. If the problem exists in all operatings systems it makes more sense to correct the problem in all of them rather than ignore the problem because others have it as well.
The fact that you could do as you suggest only tells me that the entire file management system and patch process needs to be overhauled on all operating systems.