I was trying to have a civil discourse with you; but then you just started spewing nonsense.
1. The "age of majority" is 18. Has been ajudicated that since people bitched about being able to be drafted and die at 18, but not able to vote.
And yet they can't drink, but here, smoke a cigarette.
2. The Supremes have decided that the term "Militia" originally applied to "all males between the ages of 18 and 45", and therefore, the second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right, not a power (governments don.'t have rights) of the government.
And they have been wrong and can be reversed.
3. You don't have to be living in the wilds of Alaska to be in an area where "the police" are simply too far away to be of ANY practical protection/help. There are a LOT of people that live far enough out of town that calling 911 isn't going to bring a response in any reasonable amount of time. I used to live in such an area. It was about 15 minutes BEST CASE by car from the nearest town with ANY Police. A LOT can happen in 15 minutes!!! I can assure you, EVERYONE in that area had a gun for protection, and slept much better for it. But even in an urban area (I now live about four blocks from a police station), and if an intruder was standing in my bedroom doorway, "Stop or I'll DIAL!" would NOT have the same positive effect as making the door jamb disappear next to his head...
In a perfect world, what you say is true. In the real world, that almost never happens. I wonder why?
4. School shootings can be effectively brought to zero with a few changes:
a. Stop prescribing SSRIs to people under the age of 30.
b. Have at least TWO armed and trained guards at each and every school, and encourage and allow teachers to train for, and carry , a firearm at all times when working.
Have you kept up with some of those awesome teachers? They might actually be a mass shooter waiting to happen. And I guess you'd rather have more suicides? Although I can agree that doctors today overprescribe medication: "splinter in your pinkie? Here's 30 days of oxycontin." There's a simple answer to that one but that's a whole different topic.
There. Done. Don't try to regulate it from the supply-side; that simply doesn't work (e.g War on Drugs, Online Gambling, etc.); instead, make the opportunity go away. The first couple of times that some special snowflake who thinks they are gonna start a shoot'em-up in school gets kneecapped by a security guard that can respond in 30 seconds, not 30 MINUTES, so they are still alive to stand trial, "school shootings" will go back to their former "once in 25 year" level, and even then, there will be like ONE victim, instead of one DOZEN victims...
Actually, if no one has guns, it's impossible to have mass shootings. That's a pretty straightforward logic problem. Yet somehow there's a middle road, and other countries have taken it, with legal gun ownership and no mass shootings. I'd say we take a good look at how they do it because it's quite apparent all the various approaches we've taken are abject failures.
The problem lies in the weasel-word "reasonable". That is EXACTLY the type of language that "slippery-slopes" are paved-with!!! As ambiguous as the wording of the 2nd Amendment is, it still has the all-important phrase "shall not be infringed."
So you agree with my core premise - that all gun regulations are unconstitutional according to that interpretation?
Anything else invites a police-state....
So you're 100% for giving every convict on release a loaded M-16A, a grenade launcher and a Colt 45? If not, why not?
If you said no, then do you oppose letting them buy one? What if they're a convicted murderer? A multiple murderer?
How about if they're batshit insane but kept "ok" and ready for release thanks to modern medications? (I ask this because these particular folks tend to not like how the drugs make them feel and tend to stop taking them on occasion)
Short story IMNSHO - guns need strong regulation, at least to the level we allow people to drive cars, and should likely be registered yearly plus inspections just like cars, with a yearly fee to cover registration. On top of that, I'd propose that you have to be 21 or even 25 to purchase a gun, all fall under the guise of a well-regulated militia, which was the justification for the 2nd. Technically, with the second taken as a whole, that doesn't even go against the second, it falls under the well-regulated militia portion of the clause. As for the age of majority, 21 is that age and those under it are not part of the "people" under the Constitution for legal purposes (aren't lawyers fun?) so an outright ban for under 21s also does not fall afoul of the 2nd and that can be done at the federal level. Note that none of what I proposed prevents any one wanting a gun for hunting or sport that is not a convict or mentally unstable, both cases which have special rules regarding rights. It does impose regulations, which is not an infringement as implied by the 2nd. I specifically left out defense, because the 2nd implies that is the onus of the well-regulated militia, not individuals. In today's world in the US, if you need a weapon for defense there's a bigger problem that your weapon isn't going to help with unless you happen to be that very very tiny 0.000001% of the population that lives essentially in wilderness areas where wildlife is actually a threat.
Happy to. When you're rolling out projects above the 6 figure range all of a sudden those license agreements and support costs become minor compared to potential losses. Truth be told, it's a simple case of CYA - you used accepted and covered software and had no reason to expect something like 'x' to occur sounds a whole lot better to management then "well, this fly by night open source distro had this super cool widget we wanted to use and it seemed stable so...." You can tell which of those 2 cases results in someone unintentionally looking for a new job, as in projects of that size you're paid to mitigate risks, not increase them.
Your first mistake is believing that anything Wheeler did was "pro consumer". Wheeler didn't have a change of heart, you simply fail to understand how what you think was good, was actually bad for citizens.
He made ISPs subject to Title II in support of Net Neutrality. How was that not pro consumer?
Typical Trump cultist.
There's your second mistake. I didn't vote for Trump.
Simple solution to that perception - don't sound like one.
That said, Killary was the worst pick the Democratic Party could have made and that's really saying something. Everyone knows she's corrupt as fuck, likely responsible for killings, and a borderline sociopath, even many people on the Left. We got Trump because Democrats failed to give us anyone better because the Clintons held too much Democratic Party power, simple as that. The Republicans/Trump didn't win, the Democratic Party lost.
Several things I agree with - the Republicans definitely didn't win, and the Democrats lost precisely because they put up a virtually unelectable candidate with tons of baggage (legit or not doesn't matter, perception does) The Republicans could have easily put up any one of at least 10 of the final 16 contenders and won handily. Instead they put up Trump to see which candidate could be hated more, I guess. The only surprising thing to me is how large a contingent of Trump voters continue to cut off their noses to spite their faces. It's shocking there's that much short-sighted hatred going on.
I'll bet a lot of both Democrats and Republicans regret not having a President Cruz about now.
I guess there might be some people that hate themselves and their families more than Trump voters. I haven't seen any. It'll be interesting if Cruz retains his seat this coming election, his is being contested.
I stand corrected. Thanks for that one. So, interestingly enough, that brings me to the second, which based on that reading essentially says that any law denying guns is unconstitutional, Supreme Court common sense rulings be damned. Perhaps it's time to pass an amendment clarifying the second for today's world. We no longer have the same needs, worries, nor civil issues from back in the 1700s, and perhaps it is time to amend the second to allow reasonable controls.
I was against Wheeler until he finally did the unexpected and got some pro-consumer regulations going. To say I was shocked by Wheeler's actions would be a massive understatement.
Glad you're so blindly partisan that a single statement immediately puts someone on your "against me" list. Typical Trump cultist. FYI: I can dislike more than 1 candidate, and just because I really dislike one doesn't mean I like the other.
You should have stopped at the 4th. It can be argued that a right to privacy is explicitly stated there. The 9th just seals it, but only for the feds. State governments were free to do whatever.
Since I stopped using anything with scents or dyes in it, I've become really aware of anything with perfumes.
I have been sensitive to the poisons used to make perfumes for about 20 years now. My bowels frequently activate if I breathe while close to someone wearing that crap.
We're calling for his head for abdicating his responsibilities to regulate broadcasters for the good of the people. Instead, every step he's taken has been to de-regulate corporations so they can maximize their profits. Prove me wrong with actual facts if you disagree.
To go back to the case for illegality, it does seem given his career that there's just a little payback going on there, somewhere. There's no way someone would be so corporate leaning and anti-consumer without some profit attached for him somewhere, we just need to find them. Unfortunately, I'll bet it is as future 7 figure jobs on multiple corporate boards as a reward, to which we'll just have to nod in knowing acceptance with shit-all we can do about it.
You're presenting a false delima. It's not an either or choice, there are many others. MS chose to screw their customers and lock things down ever tighter. They have always been responsive, attempting to own new markets by leveraging their clout. I can't name a single product that wasn't based on this approach after their DOS purchase.
Microsoft is not aiming for the Apple market. Apple charges a premium and it's customers are the people who buy their products. Apple still does some lock in by making Apple products work best with other Apple products but the purchasers of its hardware are still its primary customer.
Apple's products are pricey, but in many cases no pricier than equivalent alternatives. Just because a Lexus RC-F is expensive doesn't mean it's priced at a premium compared to a Honda. If all you're looking to do is fulfill a set of requirements met by the Honda, then the Lexus isn't targeted at you and would seem to be priced at a premium.
Microsoft is aiming for a completely different market. Microsoft is trying to change to the android/facebook/google business model where it gives its product away for free. The end user is no longer their customer. Their customer is the advertisers, the developers, and the purchasers of things like Office 360. They have decided that there is not enough profit margin on the OS to bother charging for it and it's better to get the money from businesses than cash strapped consumers.
Microsoft is reeling from losing its monopoly grip on the whole computer experience. They lost the server market to linux, they lost the phone market to Apple and Google, they lost the web market to Firefox (and then nails in the coffin with the mobile market needing to be served) and they lost the ability of Office to leverage lockin because of the mobile market being bigger and more useful to customers than the desktop market and their business clients basically laid down the gauntlet - work with my mobile device or else. Tie all that together, and MS is looking for a way to continue its current revenue sources even if it has to lower prices rather than lose everything to Apple/Linux/Google, which they were well on their way to doing.
Fair question - number 1: I don't have to provide any justification for RH - they have enterprise support and are accepted by management because of contractual options (as in there are contracts with RH that dictate how things are supported, who's responsible, etc, all those business type things pure techies don't usually pay much attention to) Debian doesn't, at least not as of the last time I had to go through the process of getting a new installation and configuration approved. There's no need for #2, because that right there is the skyscraper you have to leap before any other regular hurdles pop up.
FWIW, when I run Linux as a desktop I too choose Mint. I do not like RH/CentOS/Fedora for this purpose.
Whatever ads you imagine "Winblows" pushes on you are dwarfed by the ads pushed on you when you take your browser - regardless of operating environment - to any social media website, any news site, etc.
Well, that would be close to 0. (Unfortunately, some ads are embedded directly into a page, and aren't subject to adblockers, so it's not 0)
I'd have to second this - for things that matter and where you don't want to be working 24/7, RH is your goto. I don't think I'd run Debian on anything that matters. Although I do miss my Sun boxes, throw them in a closet and forget about them for 10 years.
Ever heard of a phone book? I think my phone number is plastered pretty much all over the internet. That's generally how a communications medium like a phone works.
Last I checked, my number isn't in the phone book, and has never been there. That's on purpose, of course.
That still only comments on Cuomo's comment, which is a story, but not THE story originally asked for. It doesn't demonstrate CNN lying. It demonstrates Cuomo saying something on video that's incorrect, which of course would never happen with other sources of video like ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, or the WH press office. All of those video statements, however, are not "news stories" which are researched and published articles, i.e., what's being asked for here.
It's the fact that "Hey Siri" is interpreted locally. Compared to Google and Alexa at least, where I believe everything goes to the mothership. I'd have to double check that though.
Slashdot Mirror
So you have a spacestation, or 1 ton of material. Which is going to fit on top of your rocket?
Not so humble opinion, INDEED!
I was trying to have a civil discourse with you; but then you just started spewing nonsense.
1. The "age of majority" is 18. Has been ajudicated that since people bitched about being able to be drafted and die at 18, but not able to vote.
And yet they can't drink, but here, smoke a cigarette.
2. The Supremes have decided that the term "Militia" originally applied to "all males between the ages of 18 and 45", and therefore, the second amendment is an INDIVIDUAL right, not a power (governments don.'t have rights) of the government.
And they have been wrong and can be reversed.
3. You don't have to be living in the wilds of Alaska to be in an area where "the police" are simply too far away to be of ANY practical protection/help. There are a LOT of people that live far enough out of town that calling 911 isn't going to bring a response in any reasonable amount of time. I used to live in such an area. It was about 15 minutes BEST CASE by car from the nearest town with ANY Police. A LOT can happen in 15 minutes!!! I can assure you, EVERYONE in that area had a gun for protection, and slept much better for it. But even in an urban area (I now live about four blocks from a police station), and if an intruder was standing in my bedroom doorway, "Stop or I'll DIAL!" would NOT have the same positive effect as making the door jamb disappear next to his head...
In a perfect world, what you say is true. In the real world, that almost never happens. I wonder why?
4. School shootings can be effectively brought to zero with a few changes:
a. Stop prescribing SSRIs to people under the age of 30.
b. Have at least TWO armed and trained guards at each and every school, and encourage and allow teachers to train for, and carry , a firearm at all times when working.
Have you kept up with some of those awesome teachers? They might actually be a mass shooter waiting to happen. And I guess you'd rather have more suicides? Although I can agree that doctors today overprescribe medication: "splinter in your pinkie? Here's 30 days of oxycontin." There's a simple answer to that one but that's a whole different topic.
There. Done. Don't try to regulate it from the supply-side; that simply doesn't work (e.g War on Drugs, Online Gambling, etc.); instead, make the opportunity go away. The first couple of times that some special snowflake who thinks they are gonna start a shoot'em-up in school gets kneecapped by a security guard that can respond in 30 seconds, not 30 MINUTES, so they are still alive to stand trial, "school shootings" will go back to their former "once in 25 year" level, and even then, there will be like ONE victim, instead of one DOZEN victims...
Actually, if no one has guns, it's impossible to have mass shootings. That's a pretty straightforward logic problem. Yet somehow there's a middle road, and other countries have taken it, with legal gun ownership and no mass shootings. I'd say we take a good look at how they do it because it's quite apparent all the various approaches we've taken are abject failures.
No, it isn't.
The problem lies in the weasel-word "reasonable". That is EXACTLY the type of language that "slippery-slopes" are paved-with!!! As ambiguous as the wording of the 2nd Amendment is, it still has the all-important phrase "shall not be infringed."
So you agree with my core premise - that all gun regulations are unconstitutional according to that interpretation?
Anything else invites a police-state....
So you're 100% for giving every convict on release a loaded M-16A, a grenade launcher and a Colt 45? If not, why not?
If you said no, then do you oppose letting them buy one? What if they're a convicted murderer? A multiple murderer?
How about if they're batshit insane but kept "ok" and ready for release thanks to modern medications? (I ask this because these particular folks tend to not like how the drugs make them feel and tend to stop taking them on occasion)
Short story IMNSHO - guns need strong regulation, at least to the level we allow people to drive cars, and should likely be registered yearly plus inspections just like cars, with a yearly fee to cover registration. On top of that, I'd propose that you have to be 21 or even 25 to purchase a gun, all fall under the guise of a well-regulated militia, which was the justification for the 2nd. Technically, with the second taken as a whole, that doesn't even go against the second, it falls under the well-regulated militia portion of the clause. As for the age of majority, 21 is that age and those under it are not part of the "people" under the Constitution for legal purposes (aren't lawyers fun?) so an outright ban for under 21s also does not fall afoul of the 2nd and that can be done at the federal level. Note that none of what I proposed prevents any one wanting a gun for hunting or sport that is not a convict or mentally unstable, both cases which have special rules regarding rights. It does impose regulations, which is not an infringement as implied by the 2nd. I specifically left out defense, because the 2nd implies that is the onus of the well-regulated militia, not individuals. In today's world in the US, if you need a weapon for defense there's a bigger problem that your weapon isn't going to help with unless you happen to be that very very tiny 0.000001% of the population that lives essentially in wilderness areas where wildlife is actually a threat.
Happy to. When you're rolling out projects above the 6 figure range all of a sudden those license agreements and support costs become minor compared to potential losses. Truth be told, it's a simple case of CYA - you used accepted and covered software and had no reason to expect something like 'x' to occur sounds a whole lot better to management then "well, this fly by night open source distro had this super cool widget we wanted to use and it seemed stable so...." You can tell which of those 2 cases results in someone unintentionally looking for a new job, as in projects of that size you're paid to mitigate risks, not increase them.
Your first mistake is believing that anything Wheeler did was "pro consumer". Wheeler didn't have a change of heart, you simply fail to understand how what you think was good, was actually bad for citizens.
He made ISPs subject to Title II in support of Net Neutrality. How was that not pro consumer?
Typical Trump cultist.
There's your second mistake. I didn't vote for Trump.
Simple solution to that perception - don't sound like one.
That said, Killary was the worst pick the Democratic Party could have made and that's really saying something. Everyone knows she's corrupt as fuck, likely responsible for killings, and a borderline sociopath, even many people on the Left. We got Trump because Democrats failed to give us anyone better because the Clintons held too much Democratic Party power, simple as that. The Republicans/Trump didn't win, the Democratic Party lost.
Several things I agree with - the Republicans definitely didn't win, and the Democrats lost precisely because they put up a virtually unelectable candidate with tons of baggage (legit or not doesn't matter, perception does) The Republicans could have easily put up any one of at least 10 of the final 16 contenders and won handily. Instead they put up Trump to see which candidate could be hated more, I guess. The only surprising thing to me is how large a contingent of Trump voters continue to cut off their noses to spite their faces. It's shocking there's that much short-sighted hatred going on.
I'll bet a lot of both Democrats and Republicans regret not having a President Cruz about now.
I guess there might be some people that hate themselves and their families more than Trump voters. I haven't seen any. It'll be interesting if Cruz retains his seat this coming election, his is being contested.
I stand corrected. Thanks for that one. So, interestingly enough, that brings me to the second, which based on that reading essentially says that any law denying guns is unconstitutional, Supreme Court common sense rulings be damned. Perhaps it's time to pass an amendment clarifying the second for today's world. We no longer have the same needs, worries, nor civil issues from back in the 1700s, and perhaps it is time to amend the second to allow reasonable controls.
I was against Wheeler until he finally did the unexpected and got some pro-consumer regulations going. To say I was shocked by Wheeler's actions would be a massive understatement.
Glad you're so blindly partisan that a single statement immediately puts someone on your "against me" list. Typical Trump cultist. FYI: I can dislike more than 1 candidate, and just because I really dislike one doesn't mean I like the other.
You should have stopped at the 4th. It can be argued that a right to privacy is explicitly stated there. The 9th just seals it, but only for the feds. State governments were free to do whatever.
There's this new contraption called a razor - it'll fix that hair problem for you.
Where I live there's not enough water to go around for extended showers. Saving water has become a big component of the go-green propaganda.
If there's enough water for a shower, there's enough for a super long extended shower
Since I stopped using anything with scents or dyes in it, I've become really aware of anything with perfumes.
I have been sensitive to the poisons used to make perfumes for about 20 years now. My bowels frequently activate if I breathe while close to someone wearing that crap.
Nature provides its own fragrance in defense!
Or, not.
Strat
We're calling for his head for abdicating his responsibilities to regulate broadcasters for the good of the people. Instead, every step he's taken has been to de-regulate corporations so they can maximize their profits. Prove me wrong with actual facts if you disagree.
To go back to the case for illegality, it does seem given his career that there's just a little payback going on there, somewhere. There's no way someone would be so corporate leaning and anti-consumer without some profit attached for him somewhere, we just need to find them. Unfortunately, I'll bet it is as future 7 figure jobs on multiple corporate boards as a reward, to which we'll just have to nod in knowing acceptance with shit-all we can do about it.
You're presenting a false delima. It's not an either or choice, there are many others. MS chose to screw their customers and lock things down ever tighter. They have always been responsive, attempting to own new markets by leveraging their clout. I can't name a single product that wasn't based on this approach after their DOS purchase.
And I suppose you buy all your performance parts at the local dealer?
Why would you want to work with a company that's this hostile to you? Are you a Sony fan too?
Microsoft is not aiming for the Apple market. Apple charges a premium and it's customers are the people who buy their products. Apple still does some lock in by making Apple products work best with other Apple products but the purchasers of its hardware are still its primary customer.
Apple's products are pricey, but in many cases no pricier than equivalent alternatives. Just because a Lexus RC-F is expensive doesn't mean it's priced at a premium compared to a Honda. If all you're looking to do is fulfill a set of requirements met by the Honda, then the Lexus isn't targeted at you and would seem to be priced at a premium.
Microsoft is aiming for a completely different market. Microsoft is trying to change to the android/facebook/google business model where it gives its product away for free. The end user is no longer their customer. Their customer is the advertisers, the developers, and the purchasers of things like Office 360. They have decided that there is not enough profit margin on the OS to bother charging for it and it's better to get the money from businesses than cash strapped consumers.
Microsoft is reeling from losing its monopoly grip on the whole computer experience. They lost the server market to linux, they lost the phone market to Apple and Google, they lost the web market to Firefox (and then nails in the coffin with the mobile market needing to be served) and they lost the ability of Office to leverage lockin because of the mobile market being bigger and more useful to customers than the desktop market and their business clients basically laid down the gauntlet - work with my mobile device or else. Tie all that together, and MS is looking for a way to continue its current revenue sources even if it has to lower prices rather than lose everything to Apple/Linux/Google, which they were well on their way to doing.
Fair question - number 1: I don't have to provide any justification for RH - they have enterprise support and are accepted by management because of contractual options (as in there are contracts with RH that dictate how things are supported, who's responsible, etc, all those business type things pure techies don't usually pay much attention to) Debian doesn't, at least not as of the last time I had to go through the process of getting a new installation and configuration approved. There's no need for #2, because that right there is the skyscraper you have to leap before any other regular hurdles pop up.
FWIW, when I run Linux as a desktop I too choose Mint. I do not like RH/CentOS/Fedora for this purpose.
ultra processed is not that new a thing. most of our school food was pretty heavily processed 20 years ago.
Well, that certainly brings up some potential causes to explain what's wrong with millennials.
Whatever ads you imagine "Winblows" pushes on you are dwarfed by the ads pushed on you when you take your browser - regardless of operating environment - to any social media website, any news site, etc.
Well, that would be close to 0. (Unfortunately, some ads are embedded directly into a page, and aren't subject to adblockers, so it's not 0)
I'd have to second this - for things that matter and where you don't want to be working 24/7, RH is your goto. I don't think I'd run Debian on anything that matters. Although I do miss my Sun boxes, throw them in a closet and forget about them for 10 years.
Ever heard of a phone book? I think my phone number is plastered pretty much all over the internet. That's generally how a communications medium like a phone works.
Last I checked, my number isn't in the phone book, and has never been there. That's on purpose, of course.
You don't have FB blackholed?
That still only comments on Cuomo's comment, which is a story, but not THE story originally asked for. It doesn't demonstrate CNN lying. It demonstrates Cuomo saying something on video that's incorrect, which of course would never happen with other sources of video like ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, or the WH press office. All of those video statements, however, are not "news stories" which are researched and published articles, i.e., what's being asked for here.
I like your accounting skills. I'm sure we can find a place for you in Trump's financial advisors to fix this minor budget deficit.
It's the fact that "Hey Siri" is interpreted locally. Compared to Google and Alexa at least, where I believe everything goes to the mothership. I'd have to double check that though.