The University of Bologna has been handing out law degrees since that time. While its founding was for studying Roman law, it is debatable when the study of canon was introduced and if it met the definition of theology.
The study of religion (theology) is actually something quite recent. After all, even today you run the risk of execution for questioning religion in certain religious societies. They practice their religion, not theology.
You don't believe religious leaders, but you attach "science" and all of the sudden you believe them? Theology has been methodically studied for two millenia longer than geology.
I do believe geology was studied far earlier than theology, in that mining for gemstones and various ores predates almost all known religions and certainly all modern ones.
"Also, Trump and his cronies are rich enough that the mortgage deduction doesn't do them any good whatsoever, so capping it doesn't hurt them either."
So what you're saying here is that it doesn't benefit them, right? So this would invalidate your original idiocy. Thank you for playing. Have a nice day.
Are you really that dense? The mortgage cap was a way to make the average middle/upper middle pay for the tax cut for the rich. To spell it out for you, they increased taxes on the working middle/upper middle class to pay for the tax cut for the rich/corporations.
I retract the question as it's obvious you are so invested in proving Trump isn't benefitting from the "tax reform" that logic and reality have no bearing on your thoughts.
I still use applications I acquired 10+ years ago and have no need to "upgrade".
Exactly this. Until recently I still used a couple of apps from back in the early 2000s (Actually, I think I still have one) and they worked fine until the most recent OS updates deleted a few deprecated APIs that some depended upon. What's really cool, though, is that you can run some of those older programs in VMs and they work as well or better, because the hardware has improved that much. So that works for me.
I was willing to purchase Photoshop for $500, which was the price I was looking at when I considered it. I grimaced, but considered it, and then they announced the subscription model as they only option for the future, which indicated to me that updates/upgrades were already dead for perpetual licenses, so why bother? My needs aren't consistent, they're sporadic, so going through the activate/deactivate process every time I needed something to save money on the subscription was just too onerous and probably wouldn't have saved me much. So I continued with the tools I had, foregoing PS, and then alternatives started popping up that dealt with enough to meet at least the base needs. But, I'm always open to something new that will make the process better/easier.
Yeah, this is the only established competitor I know of. On 1 is another, but I haven't used their stuff yet. The rest are new, and I haven't really seen anyone rise to the top yet.
You've got a whole range of products to choose from and they support various OSes better than Adobe's offerings: Capture One, Affinity, On 1, Pixelmator, Snapheal, FX PhotoStudio are just a few that I've been playing about with to replace various portions of the workflow. I'll figure out which ones I'll settle on one day.
I too was willing to buy 1 or 2 products I was interested in until they announced they were moving to a subscription model. Instead of a casual user, they now have no user.
You can, I think, still get a permanent license of Lightroom. However, I wouldn't, as Adobe has already stated they're moving everything to the subscription model. Actually, I'm in the market for some decent photo management software, any suggestions on competitors for Lightroom and the dead Aperture?
Microsoft was a bit like the Shah or Czar - a dictator sure but so long as you didn't directly oppose them they'd leave you alone.
Microsoft was more like Putin, no dissent allowed, no upstart left alone, nothing that wasn't in their control would be allowed to run unfettered. And if you happened to find a niche that was profitable, they'd consume you or starve you. Apple hasn't done any of that. Even Google hasn't gone that far, yet. Despite Android's reach, Google doesn't control 95% of it, the telecoms and manufacturers mostly do. While they're trying to rein it in, I doubt Samsung, for instance, will follow suit.
While undoubtably people with a sub-100 IQ voted for Trump, equally people with a sub-100 IQ voted against him too.
This does not mean his election victory is because of stupid people.
OK. I get it. I suppose the rest are all stable geniuses.
Are you shitting me? Small uneducated children could counter your arguments, this isn't a sign of intelligence.
You're wasting my time, feel free to reply but don't go expecting me to read it. Hunt down a small child if you want another response that points out the flaws in your argument.
Hey, I'm not the fuckwit that thinks he's intellectually superior
So you're just a fuckwit? OK, got it.
Just remember, if the average IQ is 100 and yours is higher, at least half the people are dumber than you. Now consider that less than 50% of the people voted for Trump and...... that click you just heard was the light switch coming on, because we certainly can tell that a large number of Trump supporters are not the above average crowd from their public statements. Now you just go on proving your intelligence.
I feel like most babies under a year could probably be taken care of by machines better than people, if only because the children have near zero communication ability besides crying, well known needs, and a robot would have infinite patience. Plus a robot could do all that Asian Tiger Mom shit like play Mozart and recite Shakespeare that most real parents can't be bothered to do.
Slap a modern olfactory replica silicon representation of mom and dad on them, and they could bond with mom and dad also.
This shouldn't be ironic, but it is....Saying your Roomba can't do it, so a robot a decade hence won't be able to is about as silly as...
If you'd said 5 years, I would have taken you at your word. The progress on this level is accelerating visibly at the speeds seen for computers in the 90s. The capabilities become cheap enough to be common and you get an explosion of productivity. The end for many jobs will be jarringly sudden when their time comes.
Well, a lot of the reason for that being "poorer", is today everyone is trying to keep up with the Joneses.
If you want to stop that nonsense, make credit more difficult to get. Do that by reducing the interest rate that is chargeable to a maximum of double the fed rate or 5%. Credit will dry up for anyone but the highest levels of credit worthiness.
Trump won for a variety of reasons, but not least because a large portion of the populace disliked both candidates enough that press manipulation was sufficient to sway the vote. I don't cut the Dems any slack here, they chose about the only candidate that made Trump even a possible contender.
Slashdot Mirror
The University of Bologna has been handing out law degrees since that time. While its founding was for studying Roman law, it is debatable when the study of canon was introduced and if it met the definition of theology.
The study of religion (theology) is actually something quite recent. After all, even today you run the risk of execution for questioning religion in certain religious societies. They practice their religion, not theology.
You don't believe religious leaders, but you attach "science" and all of the sudden you believe them? Theology has been methodically studied for two millenia longer than geology.
I do believe geology was studied far earlier than theology, in that mining for gemstones and various ores predates almost all known religions and certainly all modern ones.
"Also, Trump and his cronies are rich enough that the mortgage deduction doesn't do them any good whatsoever, so capping it doesn't hurt them either."
So what you're saying here is that it doesn't benefit them, right? So this would invalidate your original idiocy. Thank you for playing. Have a nice day.
Are you really that dense? The mortgage cap was a way to make the average middle/upper middle pay for the tax cut for the rich. To spell it out for you, they increased taxes on the working middle/upper middle class to pay for the tax cut for the rich/corporations.
I retract the question as it's obvious you are so invested in proving Trump isn't benefitting from the "tax reform" that logic and reality have no bearing on your thoughts.
Capture One definitely has some nice features. I just haven't used it enough to commit to it yet. Maybe this year.
It's $20/month, unless you get the photography plan, to which they've added it recently. I wonder what the difference is between the two?
I still use applications I acquired 10+ years ago and have no need to "upgrade".
Exactly this. Until recently I still used a couple of apps from back in the early 2000s (Actually, I think I still have one) and they worked fine until the most recent OS updates deleted a few deprecated APIs that some depended upon. What's really cool, though, is that you can run some of those older programs in VMs and they work as well or better, because the hardware has improved that much. So that works for me.
Last I checked, it was roughly 2 years of subscription for PS.
Anything non-windows is welcome. I have heard of it, haven't tried it yet either.
I was willing to purchase Photoshop for $500, which was the price I was looking at when I considered it. I grimaced, but considered it, and then they announced the subscription model as they only option for the future, which indicated to me that updates/upgrades were already dead for perpetual licenses, so why bother? My needs aren't consistent, they're sporadic, so going through the activate/deactivate process every time I needed something to save money on the subscription was just too onerous and probably wouldn't have saved me much. So I continued with the tools I had, foregoing PS, and then alternatives started popping up that dealt with enough to meet at least the base needs. But, I'm always open to something new that will make the process better/easier.
Yeah, this is the only established competitor I know of. On 1 is another, but I haven't used their stuff yet. The rest are new, and I haven't really seen anyone rise to the top yet.
You've got a whole range of products to choose from and they support various OSes better than Adobe's offerings: Capture One, Affinity, On 1, Pixelmator, Snapheal, FX PhotoStudio are just a few that I've been playing about with to replace various portions of the workflow. I'll figure out which ones I'll settle on one day.
I too was willing to buy 1 or 2 products I was interested in until they announced they were moving to a subscription model. Instead of a casual user, they now have no user.
You can, I think, still get a permanent license of Lightroom. However, I wouldn't, as Adobe has already stated they're moving everything to the subscription model. Actually, I'm in the market for some decent photo management software, any suggestions on competitors for Lightroom and the dead Aperture?
Microsoft was a bit like the Shah or Czar - a dictator sure but so long as you didn't directly oppose them they'd leave you alone.
Microsoft was more like Putin, no dissent allowed, no upstart left alone, nothing that wasn't in their control would be allowed to run unfettered. And if you happened to find a niche that was profitable, they'd consume you or starve you. Apple hasn't done any of that. Even Google hasn't gone that far, yet. Despite Android's reach, Google doesn't control 95% of it, the telecoms and manufacturers mostly do. While they're trying to rein it in, I doubt Samsung, for instance, will follow suit.
Rogue One.
While undoubtably people with a sub-100 IQ voted for Trump, equally people with a sub-100 IQ voted against him too.
This does not mean his election victory is because of stupid people.
OK. I get it. I suppose the rest are all stable geniuses.
Are you shitting me? Small uneducated children could counter your arguments, this isn't a sign of intelligence.
You're wasting my time, feel free to reply but don't go expecting me to read it. Hunt down a small child if you want another response that points out the flaws in your argument.
And yet you can't.
If they want the formula, have them write it out.
Hey, I'm not the fuckwit that thinks he's intellectually superior
So you're just a fuckwit? OK, got it.
Just remember, if the average IQ is 100 and yours is higher, at least half the people are dumber than you. Now consider that less than 50% of the people voted for Trump and...... that click you just heard was the light switch coming on, because we certainly can tell that a large number of Trump supporters are not the above average crowd from their public statements. Now you just go on proving your intelligence.
Because if it's incorrect, so is the answer. If the teacher cannot determine that, then the homework is not properly designed and implemented.
I feel like most babies under a year could probably be taken care of by machines better than people, if only because the children have near zero communication ability besides crying, well known needs, and a robot would have infinite patience. Plus a robot could do all that Asian Tiger Mom shit like play Mozart and recite Shakespeare that most real parents can't be bothered to do.
Slap a modern olfactory replica silicon representation of mom and dad on them, and they could bond with mom and dad also.
This shouldn't be ironic, but it is. ...Saying your Roomba can't do it, so a robot a decade hence won't be able to is about as silly as ...
If you'd said 5 years, I would have taken you at your word. The progress on this level is accelerating visibly at the speeds seen for computers in the 90s. The capabilities become cheap enough to be common and you get an explosion of productivity. The end for many jobs will be jarringly sudden when their time comes.
Well, a lot of the reason for that being "poorer", is today everyone is trying to keep up with the Joneses.
If you want to stop that nonsense, make credit more difficult to get. Do that by reducing the interest rate that is chargeable to a maximum of double the fed rate or 5%. Credit will dry up for anyone but the highest levels of credit worthiness.
I'd say the idiots in the DNC (all gone now) were exceptionally helpful in making Trump a viable candidate.
Trump won for a variety of reasons, but not least because a large portion of the populace disliked both candidates enough that press manipulation was sufficient to sway the vote. I don't cut the Dems any slack here, they chose about the only candidate that made Trump even a possible contender.
But keep touting your intellectual superiority.