The common uses of the words really have no conflict; it's all pretty clear to me.
Yes but you're clearly not an American hating idiot who is willing to resort to any tactic, no matter how stupid, to try and stick it to the "Great Satan". There are plenty of legitamte reasons to be angry with the United States of America and it's citizens and getting your panties in a buch because we, along with much of the rest of the world, refer to ourselves as Americans isn't one of them.
B) Refuse to comply and (evilly) deprive every Chinese citizen of what is arguably the world's best search engine, not to mention all their other projects that are doing quite well.
Yes but if you're providing the Chinese citizen with a dumbed down (censored) version of Google then you're not really providing them of the world's best search engine in the first place are you? Google is a great search engine because of both the search algorithm as well as the vast amount of content that it has indexed. You need both to have a great search engine and the Chinese goverment will not allow you to provide both.
I don't have a problem with a company choosing to censor content at the request of the Chinese goverment. I do have a problem with a company that chooses to do so when their motto is "do no evil". It's completely hypocritical and Google should be called on it.
Let's add a check box to the IRS form. Check it if you want some of your tax dollars used to fund this kind of research, don't check it if you are opposed.
If you've always opposed this kind of research then you are not allowed to benefit from any of the treatments that may come about as a result of it. Let's see what these social conservatives have to say if it leads to cures or significant improvements in treating some of these horrible diseases somewhere down the line should they themselves become afflicted. Any nut job who takes things on "faith" (aka they believe absolutely in what they read in a book and/or in what they are told to believe in by others without any other outside supporting evidence) should not be allowed to make scientific and/or medical decisions for the rest of the country.
I don't hear many of these social conservatives bitching and moaning that their tax dollars are being used to fund the war in Iraq. Not a peep about their tax dollars being used to execute inmates. The whole "sanctity of life" principle as espoused by social conservatives is kind of selective thing, isn't it? How convenient...
Corporations looking to turn a profit don't care. They aren't catering to the Slashdot crowd. iTunes is a resounding success and proves that if a legal music download service is done correctly then people will use it. Nobody is interested in pandering to the "if it's not an open format then I won't use it" crowd because if it's a fair DRM scheme it's been proven that Joe Sixpack will use it. As long as you can burn purchased tracks to a CD then you can re-rip them in any format you want. 99% of the population doesn't care about a small loss in quality because they aren't audiophiles and aren't listening with high end gear anyway. This service will fail, but not because the music isn't in an open format. It'll fail because P2P is a stupid way to distribute content that you have to pay for.
You're in idiot. Congress controls the purse strings in Washington. The President proposes a budget but Congress doesn't have to abide by it. Democrats controlled congress when we took on all of that debt. Get the facts straight before you open your idiotic liberal mouth.
I wholeheartedly agree. It is unacceptable that stem cell research is being outlawed pretty much everywhere
Except it hasn't been outlawed pretty much anywhere. Get the facts straight. The President has banned federal funds from being used for stem cell reaseach except for research performed on the lines that existed before the ban was put into place. I'm not defending that stupid policy, mearly pointing out that banning federal funding is hardly equivalent to making something illegal. Privately funded research is happening as we speak. Several states are funding research as well.
Re:We'll Be Prepared for the Rarest of Events
on
Back to the Bunker
·
· Score: 1
Yes, things like heart disease are immediate problems, but that doesn't mean you can simply stick your head in the sand and ignore potential long-term problems.
Why not? Liberals have been doing exactly that for years.
The real problem we have here is that George W. Douchebag attacked the wrong fucking country and now were screwed. We're so tied up in Iraq we can't go after the real problem. Iran. We had Saddam contained. Iran was then, and remains now, the real threat. Luckily for us, Isreal won't sit back and let them build the bomb. It's going to throw the Middle East into turmoil, but if the West can't stop Iran with diplomacy, Isreal will do it with force.
Since it's Congress, not the President, that controls the purse strings and Republicans controlled in the House after 1994 both parties deserve credit. Read up before you comment on issues you clearly know nothing about.
Your an idiot. If you were not an idiot you would know that Congress, not the President, controls the purse strings and that it was a Repubican controlled House that helped balance the budget during the Clinton presidency. Both parties deserve credit for the balanced budget in the 90's. You would also know that it was the Democrats who controlled Congress in the 80's during the Reagan era when we really ran up the national debit. Educate yourself before you open your mouth and stick your foot in it.
I take issue with part of your argument. Law enforcement agents are allowed to search you based on speculation. It's called probable cause. Probable cause is reasonable speculation. If I'm sitting outside of a gas station at 1:30 am with a ski mask on and a cop pulls up, no crime has been committed but the officer would have probable cause to stop me and search my car because I'm behaving in a suspicious manner and the officer could reasonably speculate that a crime was about to be committed or had been committed.
By the same token if as a result of data mining the NSA is able to tell with reasonable certainty that a particular type of calling pattern is likely to be related to some kind of terrorist activity then they can and should share any intelligence they can gather from it with the FBI as well as other intelligence agencies. That being said, they key term here from the FBI perspective is "likely" and "reasonable". If the NSA keeps turning over names and nothing ever comes of them then the particular pattern or patterns in question are not likely to be related to terrorist activity and therefore the FBI wouldn't and shouldn't have probable cause to investigate any tips that are passed along based on those patterns. That's why oversight is so important here and why I'm outraged about the situation. If I was convinced that the program had the proper judicial and/or Congressional oversight then I wouldn't be so up in arms about it. As it stands now, who decides which patterns are "likely" to indicate terrorist activity? What's the threshold and who decides? How much information is the NSA sharing with the FBI and other intelligence agencies? These are important questions and judicial and/or Congressional oversight needs to occur.
The French are a joke. Any group of people who would take to the streets over... gasp.... empoyers being given the ability to fire bad employees deserve to be laughed at. What a bunch of pussies.
As others have noted, this is a joke. Those users who were affected are entitled to a replacement CD, free downloads of the music on the CD in question (in who knows what format) or a cash settlement. So someone spends hours cleaning up the mess that Sony made and they get what amounts to $15 to $20 bucks. Most people who are affected probaby won't even bother to claim anything so Sony isn't really hurt by this. It seems to me that the lawyers who brought the class action suit are the only ones who really benefit here.
Then don't be. Slashdot goes out of it's way to report each and every time something like this happens. When you consider the number of tech companies and the number of patent disputes the ratio isn't as big as it would appear. If Slashdot reported each and every car accident in the US it would appear to outsiders as if there was an epidemic when in reality when you compare the number of accidents in a day to the number of people who drive you'd find that it really wasn't.
It becomes an OS issue when the browser required to view the sites is not availabe on your OS. I'm not knocking Macs, they are the only PC's I use when I'm not at work. I'm just pointing out that you can't quite do everything on the Internet on a Mac that you can do on Windows.
There are still quite a few things on the Internet you can not do with a Mac. Leopard, if it includes built in virtulization, can't get here fast enough.
Slashdot Mirror
The common uses of the words really have no conflict; it's all pretty clear to me.
Yes but you're clearly not an American hating idiot who is willing to resort to any tactic, no matter how stupid, to try and stick it to the "Great Satan". There are plenty of legitamte reasons to be angry with the United States of America and it's citizens and getting your panties in a buch because we, along with much of the rest of the world, refer to ourselves as Americans isn't one of them.
Yes but if you're providing the Chinese citizen with a dumbed down (censored) version of Google then you're not really providing them of the world's best search engine in the first place are you? Google is a great search engine because of both the search algorithm as well as the vast amount of content that it has indexed. You need both to have a great search engine and the Chinese goverment will not allow you to provide both.
I don't have a problem with a company choosing to censor content at the request of the Chinese goverment. I do have a problem with a company that chooses to do so when their motto is "do no evil". It's completely hypocritical and Google should be called on it.
Let's add a check box to the IRS form. Check it if you want some of your tax dollars used to fund this kind of research, don't check it if you are opposed.
...
If you've always opposed this kind of research then you are not allowed to benefit from any of the treatments that may come about as a result of it. Let's see what these social conservatives have to say if it leads to cures or significant improvements in treating some of these horrible diseases somewhere down the line should they themselves become afflicted. Any nut job who takes things on "faith" (aka they believe absolutely in what they read in a book and/or in what they are told to believe in by others without any other outside supporting evidence) should not be allowed to make scientific and/or medical decisions for the rest of the country.
I don't hear many of these social conservatives bitching and moaning that their tax dollars are being used to fund the war in Iraq. Not a peep about their tax dollars being used to execute inmates. The whole "sanctity of life" principle as espoused by social conservatives is kind of selective thing, isn't it? How convenient
Corporations looking to turn a profit don't care. They aren't catering to the Slashdot crowd. iTunes is a resounding success and proves that if a legal music download service is done correctly then people will use it. Nobody is interested in pandering to the "if it's not an open format then I won't use it" crowd because if it's a fair DRM scheme it's been proven that Joe Sixpack will use it. As long as you can burn purchased tracks to a CD then you can re-rip them in any format you want. 99% of the population doesn't care about a small loss in quality because they aren't audiophiles and aren't listening with high end gear anyway. This service will fail, but not because the music isn't in an open format. It'll fail because P2P is a stupid way to distribute content that you have to pay for.
You're in idiot. Congress controls the purse strings in Washington. The President proposes a budget but Congress doesn't have to abide by it. Democrats controlled congress when we took on all of that debt. Get the facts straight before you open your idiotic liberal mouth.
Except it hasn't been outlawed pretty much anywhere. Get the facts straight. The President has banned federal funds from being used for stem cell reaseach except for research performed on the lines that existed before the ban was put into place. I'm not defending that stupid policy, mearly pointing out that banning federal funding is hardly equivalent to making something illegal. Privately funded research is happening as we speak. Several states are funding research as well.
Yes, things like heart disease are immediate problems, but that doesn't mean you can simply stick your head in the sand and ignore potential long-term problems. Why not? Liberals have been doing exactly that for years.
The real problem we have here is that George W. Douchebag attacked the wrong fucking country and now were screwed. We're so tied up in Iraq we can't go after the real problem. Iran. We had Saddam contained. Iran was then, and remains now, the real threat. Luckily for us, Isreal won't sit back and let them build the bomb. It's going to throw the Middle East into turmoil, but if the West can't stop Iran with diplomacy, Isreal will do it with force.
Perhaps HIPPA is broken because the goverment can seldom do anything correctly except for collecting taxes.
Americans don't care about other coutnries because other countries don't matter. Deal with it.
Since it's Congress, not the President, that controls the purse strings and Republicans controlled in the House after 1994 both parties deserve credit. Read up before you comment on issues you clearly know nothing about.
Your an idiot. If you were not an idiot you would know that Congress, not the President, controls the purse strings and that it was a Repubican controlled House that helped balance the budget during the Clinton presidency. Both parties deserve credit for the balanced budget in the 90's. You would also know that it was the Democrats who controlled Congress in the 80's during the Reagan era when we really ran up the national debit. Educate yourself before you open your mouth and stick your foot in it.
Were you born a douchebag?
I take issue with part of your argument. Law enforcement agents are allowed to search you based on speculation. It's called probable cause. Probable cause is reasonable speculation. If I'm sitting outside of a gas station at 1:30 am with a ski mask on and a cop pulls up, no crime has been committed but the officer would have probable cause to stop me and search my car because I'm behaving in a suspicious manner and the officer could reasonably speculate that a crime was about to be committed or had been committed.
By the same token if as a result of data mining the NSA is able to tell with reasonable certainty that a particular type of calling pattern is likely to be related to some kind of terrorist activity then they can and should share any intelligence they can gather from it with the FBI as well as other intelligence agencies. That being said, they key term here from the FBI perspective is "likely" and "reasonable". If the NSA keeps turning over names and nothing ever comes of them then the particular pattern or patterns in question are not likely to be related to terrorist activity and therefore the FBI wouldn't and shouldn't have probable cause to investigate any tips that are passed along based on those patterns. That's why oversight is so important here and why I'm outraged about the situation. If I was convinced that the program had the proper judicial and/or Congressional oversight then I wouldn't be so up in arms about it. As it stands now, who decides which patterns are "likely" to indicate terrorist activity? What's the threshold and who decides? How much information is the NSA sharing with the FBI and other intelligence agencies? These are important questions and judicial and/or Congressional oversight needs to occur.
The French are a joke. Any group of people who would take to the streets over ... gasp .... empoyers being given the ability to fire bad employees deserve to be laughed at. What a bunch of pussies.
When we place more importance on self esteem then we do on whether or not children actually know anything what do you expect?
As others have noted, this is a joke. Those users who were affected are entitled to a replacement CD, free downloads of the music on the CD in question (in who knows what format) or a cash settlement. So someone spends hours cleaning up the mess that Sony made and they get what amounts to $15 to $20 bucks. Most people who are affected probaby won't even bother to claim anything so Sony isn't really hurt by this. It seems to me that the lawyers who brought the class action suit are the only ones who really benefit here.
Call me when I can copy and paste more than text between applications consistantly.
Don't dish it out if you can't take it.
Then don't be. Slashdot goes out of it's way to report each and every time something like this happens. When you consider the number of tech companies and the number of patent disputes the ratio isn't as big as it would appear. If Slashdot reported each and every car accident in the US it would appear to outsiders as if there was an epidemic when in reality when you compare the number of accidents in a day to the number of people who drive you'd find that it really wasn't.
This is great news considering the bang up job the FDA has done recently ... oh wait ....
It becomes an OS issue when the browser required to view the sites is not availabe on your OS. I'm not knocking Macs, they are the only PC's I use when I'm not at work. I'm just pointing out that you can't quite do everything on the Internet on a Mac that you can do on Windows.
What? Then please explain the following:
http://television.aol.com/in2tv/
http://www.movielink.com/
http://www.vongo.com/
There are still quite a few things on the Internet you can not do with a Mac. Leopard, if it includes built in virtulization, can't get here fast enough.
So it's just blind luck that we've been able to get a hold of and maintain control of inflation since the 70's and early 80's? I don't think so.