Oops, I didn't read the whole post... I completely agree with it except for the "therefore I'm against marriage equality" part -- no government recognition of marriage at all is best, but allowing gay marriage is better than the status-quo.
Government should not recognize ANY marriage. If you get married that should be entirely between you, your God(s), who ever else attends where you warship, and that's it.
Government stops discriminating, and I get a war ship? Win-win!
(Hmm... should I pick a carrier or a boomer sub? Decisions, decisions...)
[In all seriousness, I completely agree with you.]
If you think that people shouldn't have the right to donate to a political cause without fear of reprisal from their employer, fine. But to give that right to some people and not others is wrong.
No it's not, if the condition is whether the person in question publicly represents the company. Firing some random Aflac employee for being bigoted against Japanese people? Not okay. Firing Gilbert Gottfried (the former voice of the Aflac Duck) for doing so? Perfectly justified (especially since Aflac does a lot of business in Japan).
As CEO, Eich publicly represented Mozilla, therefore "constructively dismissing" him (even if such a thing happened, which it didn't) would be justified.
Yep, both the Diesel 3-series (which has been around for several years now actually) and the Ram Ecodiesel are pretty high on my list of vehicles to get sooner or later (when I have kids and when I exceed the capabilities of my Ford Ranger, respectively). I just hope they're available with a manual transmission...
I think the OP meant 'automatic' as in the way most people think of automatics: there is no clutch pedal for you to work. I own a smart car and yes, there is some roughness from a dead stop. I avoid it by accelerating slowly, my wife avoids it by accelerating quickly. Still, no manual clutch = automatic. You can switch it over and force gear changes, but not much call for that while driving around town.
Right, which is why I explained the difference between a torque-converter automatic and the Smart's computer-controlled clutch "automatic."
I think you are allowing an irrational hatred of the car mar your thought patterns, did somebody in a Smart car cut you off this morning?
No, I feel this way because I test drove one, and then looked at the price and MPG figures. I was genuinely considering getting one until then.
It's really the transmission, even more so than the price/MPG, that lets the car down. I'm used to driving a manual and when I want to shift I want to shift NOW, not hit the paddle, wait a couple of seconds, and then shift. It was completely intolerable.
By the way: it's not that I think that computer-controlled clutch transmissions are inherently bad, it's that the one in the Smart sucks. VW's DSG is much better. (Not good enough that I'd pick it over a manual, mind you, but better.)
Part of the reason I bought a Smart car was for the looks (I'm a sucker that way). It makes children smile and starts up conversations in parking lots, it doesn't look like anything else and I like that.
That's fine, but there are other cars that have similar charisma yet don't suck at being cars the way the Smart does. Examples include the VW Beetle and Mini Cooper.
Stating that a 10 year old Hyundi Accent is a better option that an (implied) new Smart car shows you are veering in to hyperbole.
On the contrary, I actually did own a 2003 Hyundai Accent GT at the time I test drove a Smart, and the Accent really was a much better car. (I'd still have it today if a tree hadn't fallen on two years ago.)
Also, the Smart "automatic" a)isn't really; it's an "automated manual" with a clutch, and b) is absolutely terrible compared to either a torque-converter automatic or a manually-operated clutch.
I was just looking at cars earlier today because there's a hopefully-very-small chance I'll need a new one like, now, and if all I did was drive around town to and from work and errands and stuff, I'd seriously consider getting one.
Do yourself a favor and buy a used Hyundai Accent instead. Trust me, it's a better car. (Even a 10-year-old Accent is a better car than a brand new Smart.) Or buy a Mazda, or a Ford, or, Hell, even a Scion. There is no small car worse than a Smart.
That's still absolute shit economy relative to its size, given that a VW Golf/Jetta TDI (which, being an American, is about the only Diesel I know to compare to) is only about 5 mpg lower.
Actual good fuel economy is a 15-year-old Honda Insight at 70 mpg (US), or, for a non-hybrid, a 22-year-old Geo Metro XFi at 50 mpg (US). Smart should be fucking ashamed of itself!
Think about the USB stack, or the FireWire stack, or DVD playback? All of those are licenced and none are "free for MS to give away", yet you wouldn't want an OS that doesn't support USB.
Yet somehow, Linux manages it. You're gonna need to come up with a better straw-man to fool me...
My cars are 16 and 18 years old with about 200K miles each, and are still worth fixing.
One of them, a 1998 VW Beetle TDI, has exactly the same safety rating as one built as recently as 2011 (because it's the same unibody!), gets better fuel economy than a 2014, and pollutes less (except for particulates) because the older engine technology can use 100% biodiesel while the new one can't.
The other one is a 1996 4-cylinder Ford Ranger that gets better (or at least equal) fuel economy to any new (or newish) truck. (I tried to find the most efficient new 4x4 trucks to compare against; if you find any that are better let me know!) It admittedly is probably marginally less safe and marginally more polluting than a new truck, but not enough to be worth the 10x difference in cost!
After a while the content producers would realize they didn't need a middle man and go direct. That could be a good thing. It could also be annoying if they force you through their own sites/devices.
"Force you through their own sites/devices" counts as vertical integration.
No, all the NATO countries count as being "aligned" with the US and are therefore first-world too. Even a whole bunch of former-Warsaw Pact countries that joined in 1999/2004/2009 are now "first-world" instead of "second-world."
Where does it say the 4th amendment is enforceable internationally?
Right here, asshole:
Amendment X:
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.
Since you're too fucking stupid to get it, I'll spell it out in small words:
The Constitution limits what the Federal government is allowed to do. If the Constitution doesn't EXPLICITLY FUCKING SAY the Federal government can do something, then it CAN'T FUCKING DO IT. The Constitution does not explicitly limit the Fourth Amendment to US soil, therefore IT ISN'T FUCKING LIMITED TO US SOIL!
Now quit spreading your fascist lies and go fuck yourself!
2. Your call to "release the code" sounds nice, until you figure out that Microsoft doesn't own exclusive rights to all the code. Much of it has been licensed from other companies, some of it is entangled in other ways. Just like Apple couldn't release Rosetta since they didn't own it, the same is true with XP.
Do you realize what you're saying? Your argument is essentially "it's not my fault I can't comply with requirement A because I fucked up requirement B" which should never be a valid excuse. In a sane world, if Microsoft failed to license the code properly then that would be Microsoft's problem, not anybody else's!
I think your argument that "any other party will do" fails pretty badly since you can substitute Bush/Republicans/Conservatives in those claims (where applicable) and they remain equally valid.
Both the Democrats and the Republicans are equally hypocritical and corrupt; there's no need to be partisan about it.
Frankly, if there was local F# work, I'd jump on it in a heartbeat. I've even considered trying to convince a couple of local shops to give it a try for some advanced projects.
1. Get a job at any old.NET shop
2. Slip some F# into the codebase when nobody's looking
Maybe it depends on the tab contents. 30 tabs of "blank" or some might-as-well-have-been-Gopher page are one thing; 30 tabs of Flash/AJAX/add-ridden web-app are another.
That said, let's not get sidetracked by the breeder-vs-DINK arguments. We have one very simple, fundamental problem with getting scientifically-literate people in office:
None run.
That's because, for the most part, they're well aware of the fact that they're unelectable. I myself would be interested in running for local office, but
a) my platform would be too logically-consistent (and therefore "non-mainstream" compared to the standard Democrat or Republican platform),
b) I'm not charismatic enough to get sufficient funding in using grass-roots campaigning,
c) as a consequence of both previous points, I wouldn't be able to get endorsements or funding in the "traditional" (party-backed) way either, and
d) solving any of the previous issues -- not to mention, doing the "wheeling and dealing" required to be effective after getting into office -- would require altering my character in a way that I am not able, let alone willing, to do.
I strongly suspect most scientifically-inclined people run into the same problems. Even if one were to overcome them, the best one could hope for is to match Jimmy Carter. He managed to make it to the Presidency, sure, but the widely-held view (deservedly or not; it doesn't really matter) is that he kind of sucked at it...
Slashdot Mirror
Oops, I didn't read the whole post... I completely agree with it except for the "therefore I'm against marriage equality" part -- no government recognition of marriage at all is best, but allowing gay marriage is better than the status-quo.
Government stops discriminating, and I get a war ship? Win-win!
(Hmm... should I pick a carrier or a boomer sub? Decisions, decisions...)
[In all seriousness, I completely agree with you.]
No it's not, if the condition is whether the person in question publicly represents the company. Firing some random Aflac employee for being bigoted against Japanese people? Not okay. Firing Gilbert Gottfried (the former voice of the Aflac Duck) for doing so? Perfectly justified (especially since Aflac does a lot of business in Japan).
As CEO, Eich publicly represented Mozilla, therefore "constructively dismissing" him (even if such a thing happened, which it didn't) would be justified.
Yep, both the Diesel 3-series (which has been around for several years now actually) and the Ram Ecodiesel are pretty high on my list of vehicles to get sooner or later (when I have kids and when I exceed the capabilities of my Ford Ranger, respectively). I just hope they're available with a manual transmission...
Right, which is why I explained the difference between a torque-converter automatic and the Smart's computer-controlled clutch "automatic."
No, I feel this way because I test drove one, and then looked at the price and MPG figures. I was genuinely considering getting one until then.
It's really the transmission, even more so than the price/MPG, that lets the car down. I'm used to driving a manual and when I want to shift I want to shift NOW, not hit the paddle, wait a couple of seconds, and then shift. It was completely intolerable.
By the way: it's not that I think that computer-controlled clutch transmissions are inherently bad, it's that the one in the Smart sucks. VW's DSG is much better. (Not good enough that I'd pick it over a manual, mind you, but better.)
That's fine, but there are other cars that have similar charisma yet don't suck at being cars the way the Smart does. Examples include the VW Beetle and Mini Cooper.
On the contrary, I actually did own a 2003 Hyundai Accent GT at the time I test drove a Smart, and the Accent really was a much better car. (I'd still have it today if a tree hadn't fallen on two years ago.)
Stop comparing to Civics; they're overpriced too.
Also, the Smart "automatic" a)isn't really; it's an "automated manual" with a clutch, and b) is absolutely terrible compared to either a torque-converter automatic or a manually-operated clutch.
Do yourself a favor and buy a used Hyundai Accent instead. Trust me, it's a better car. (Even a 10-year-old Accent is a better car than a brand new Smart.) Or buy a Mazda, or a Ford, or, Hell, even a Scion. There is no small car worse than a Smart.
That's still absolute shit economy relative to its size, given that a VW Golf/Jetta TDI (which, being an American, is about the only Diesel I know to compare to) is only about 5 mpg lower.
Actual good fuel economy is a 15-year-old Honda Insight at 70 mpg (US), or, for a non-hybrid, a 22-year-old Geo Metro XFi at 50 mpg (US). Smart should be fucking ashamed of itself!
Yet somehow, Linux manages it. You're gonna need to come up with a better straw-man to fool me...
Remind me to laugh in your face when I'm independently wealthy at 40.
WTF are you talking about? 150K miles is when I buy cars, not sell them, and I pay cash.
And there's no such thing as "eventual irreparable failure" except getting totaled in an accident.
My cars are 16 and 18 years old with about 200K miles each, and are still worth fixing.
One of them, a 1998 VW Beetle TDI, has exactly the same safety rating as one built as recently as 2011 (because it's the same unibody!), gets better fuel economy than a 2014, and pollutes less (except for particulates) because the older engine technology can use 100% biodiesel while the new one can't.
The other one is a 1996 4-cylinder Ford Ranger that gets better (or at least equal) fuel economy to any new (or newish) truck. (I tried to find the most efficient new 4x4 trucks to compare against; if you find any that are better let me know!) It admittedly is probably marginally less safe and marginally more polluting than a new truck, but not enough to be worth the 10x difference in cost!
"Force you through their own sites/devices" counts as vertical integration.
No, all the NATO countries count as being "aligned" with the US and are therefore first-world too. Even a whole bunch of former-Warsaw Pact countries that joined in 1999/2004/2009 are now "first-world" instead of "second-world."
Right here, asshole:
Since you're too fucking stupid to get it, I'll spell it out in small words:
The Constitution limits what the Federal government is allowed to do. If the Constitution doesn't EXPLICITLY FUCKING SAY the Federal government can do something, then it CAN'T FUCKING DO IT. The Constitution does not explicitly limit the Fourth Amendment to US soil, therefore IT ISN'T FUCKING LIMITED TO US SOIL!
Now quit spreading your fascist lies and go fuck yourself!
Sure, if you're a consumer whore with a hard-on for disposable junk...
Do you realize what you're saying? Your argument is essentially "it's not my fault I can't comply with requirement A because I fucked up requirement B" which should never be a valid excuse. In a sane world, if Microsoft failed to license the code properly then that would be Microsoft's problem, not anybody else's!
I think your argument that "any other party will do" fails pretty badly since you can substitute Bush/Republicans/Conservatives in those claims (where applicable) and they remain equally valid.
Both the Democrats and the Republicans are equally hypocritical and corrupt; there's no need to be partisan about it.
"On US soil" was neither claimed by the grandparent, nor is it a necessary condition for qualifying the drone strikes as misuse.
WHICH clause in the Constitution says the Fourth Amendment only applies on US soil, you totalitarian asshole?!
Mod parent -1, megacorp shill. Disclosure of the manufacturing process is the opposite of a barrier to entry!
[Citation Needed]
You show me a Democrat or a Republican, and I'll show you a hypocrite.
Maybe it depends on the tab contents. 30 tabs of "blank" or some might-as-well-have-been-Gopher page are one thing; 30 tabs of Flash/AJAX/add-ridden web-app are another.
I beg to differ. With enough tabs open in the browser, frequently run out of memory with 8GB.
That's because, for the most part, they're well aware of the fact that they're unelectable. I myself would be interested in running for local office, but
I strongly suspect most scientifically-inclined people run into the same problems. Even if one were to overcome them, the best one could hope for is to match Jimmy Carter. He managed to make it to the Presidency, sure, but the widely-held view (deservedly or not; it doesn't really matter) is that he kind of sucked at it...
Ah, an ad-hominem. I accept your admission that you've lost the argument.