Do you genuinely think all successful bosses do those things? What a sad world you must live in.
Of course it's not possible someone works hard, and smart, and takes care of his employees. No, it must be through taking advantage of others that they earned their success.
Here, have a Haterade, it'll keep you hating all day long.
Check out "borderline personality disorder". It is often a diagnosis given to women, when they are truly psychopathic. And it's FAR more common in women.
"These traits aren't useful, they just don't get in the way of surviving (staying alive) and reproducing"
WRONG. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
If I only have to commit minimal resources to reproduction (by conning my way into a females bed instead of marrying her) then leave to start again, such traits make me VERY successful at reproducing.
"Go back to college and take the appropriate physics and engineering courses that will teach you..."
You think you're smarter than people who disagree with you. That's just pathetic. Do you honestly believe that I DON'T understand the science involved, or are you just an arrogant asshole (yes, NOW I'm namecalling, but that's because you ARE an arrogant asshole) who thinks his intellect allows him to comment with more influence?
One last thing before I go. This is coming. YOU CAN'T STOP IT. And you'll never convince anyone by telling them to go back to school to take physics classes before they can discuss it with you, or by acting like a prick just because you think you have insight.
My vote counts the same as yours, and mine is for BPL, from now on. I hope you hear it when I'm downloading pictures of Paris Hilton's box on my BPL connection 5 years from now.
There's a reson I and other intelligent people hate this site.
I make several cogent points about BPL, many of which are in dispute, but NONE of which are FLAMEBAIT, and you motherfucking jackass mods mod me FLAMBAIT anyway.
Guess what assholes, I guarantee the first chance I get, I'm going to vote to allow BPL. Mod that flamebait you pathetic fuckers. I don't care anymore if it causes babies to explode and spew radiation.
At least I was willing to discuss the issue, and try to listen to honest points in both directions. You cocksuckers just mod it down if you don't like it.
"Well, then how about decades of established federal laws, regulations, and international treaties that establish the Amateur Radio Service as an internationally-recognized and licensed radio service, with primary access to most of their allocated radio spectrum, and secondary to the rest (after the military and some shortwave broadcasters)?"
And amazingly, NONE of that has to do with POSESSION or OWNERSHIP of the airwaves. You are LICENSED to use them, nothing more. And NO, none of your examples refute that in any way.
"You could say that our national highway system is "MY highways too," but that doesn't mean that you don't have to care about other users."
Dumb example. Nothing I can do on a highway is equivalent to the damage that can be done with a car, and arguing by analogy is just stupid to begin with.
"There is valid concern that the BPL systems that have been deployed so far are nowhere near compliant with Part 15. And there is also a good argument that Part 15 (intended for occasional and localized radiators like, say, microwave ovens) is not appropriate for something that is going to be ubiquitous and radiating significant amounts of radio frequency energy over broad swaths of spectrum all the time."
In other words, someone else is playing in your sandbox, and despite the fact that they aren't bothering you, you think they MIGHT bother you MAYBE at some point, so you get to kick them out of the sandbox entirely. Nope, doesn't work that way.
The wonderful thing about this discussion is that hams are making asses of themselves with their whining. It's pretty clear this is coming, and instead of developing solutons that help everyone, hams keep insisting that they have a perspective that should gice them greater influence. Nope, that doesn't go either.
"If we are experiencing interference, then many other radio services that use very similar technologies and frequencies are going to encounter the same kinds of interference."
And technology will adjust. It has before, so what make you think it won't this time, apart from your biases?
I understand your point, but there is a serious problem.
That is, amateur radio is a specialized hobby, which has a few (very rarely) useful qualities that other technologies lack.
Yes, it can be useful in emergencies (as I made clear in my original post) but that's really insignificant, and yes I DO mean insignificant. Being useful once in a blue moon is a poor reason to protect ham radio.
"So, it is not hard to see that if BPL is introduced in every community in the USA, this will make the HF spectrum mostly unusable for THE ENTIRE WORLD"
That is PURE speculation, and by attempting to prevent the development of BPL, you are actually stalling progress which could eliminate the interference.
"But they should have to do it over shielded cables"
Or alternately, I would love for hams to continue to have undisrupted access, but they should use equipment that works in less than ideal situations. Why are hams so eager to place the burden on the power companies? There is probably a great reason, but what I've heard is essentially "We were here first" or as you did "there is an incredibly small niche that is insignificant, but I can spin it to appear important". That won't fly.
Now, to address your very first sentence about what I should do. YOU should get on your ham radio and tell your friends to stop crybabying and come up with a solution. No one likes a whiner.
"If you can't process or retain any visual information, you're blind. Why does it matter if it's a low level or high level failure?"
There is the seed of a good question here, but you're asking aobut two different things.
Processing the information must be studied separately, because VERY often your brain is capable of retaining information without conciously attending to it.
More importantly, I GUARANTEE the "blindness" in this study wouldn't appear if the visual information being ignored were more important that the emotion inducing event.
And just to be snotty, why bother trying to find out WHY this occurs, when you have clearly decided that the why isn't important, only that it happens.
Scientists everywhere take note, the WHY no longer matters! Once you show it happens, HOW it happens isn't important. Whew, that'll help me with my research for sure.:)
"Well, that's the problem. Maybe we need a "sierra club" or "greenpeace" to act as watchdogs on our RF spectrum..."
I think the problem is that hams believe they have some type of "right of first refusal" that allows them disproportionate influence on decisions about radio spectrum.
That's a problem because they have skin in the game, so they're biased (but so is greenpeace and the sierra club) which makes thier opinions on the subject unreliable.
Why is introducing biodiversity where it doesn't exist (and hasn't for generations) a good idea? Apart from the feel good part of the plan, the very real dangers involved as well as the cost make this seem like a waste of time.
Great idea, completely impractical, and potentially irresponsible.
"They will oppose anything which further clouds their airwaves."
They are MY airwaves too. The fact that hams use them doesn't entitle them to decide HOW they are used.
If BPL is a solution that has a market (I'm skeptical) then it should be explored. And frankly, I couldn't care less what the hams have to say about it.
The emergency service problem however, that is a real issue that may kill BPL.
"In terms of sheer wealth - the U.S. outstrips the vast majority of countries and there simply is no reason why the U.S. should ever take a back seat to technology - unless the moneyed interests demand otherwise."
Or the current tech is good enough, or the cost of implementation is FAR too high to justify (replacing copper with fiber for example). There are lots of reasons that have nothing to do with conspiracies against the working man.
"The U.S. doesn't have gasoline riots and it won't have broadband riots"
The cost of gasoline isn't high enough to justify such outrageous behavior. It costs me 80 dollars in a moderately efficient vehicle every month. That's a pittance, so why riot.
As far as the cost of broadband, what does someone NEED it for? Why would anyone risk life and limb for the opportunity to download choppy video at a cheap price?
Broadband is a luxury, THAT'S why you'll never see broadband riots. That, and the fact that the entire idea is ridiculous.
Well, if you wanted mytake on asperger's, you should have asked.
Especially since I am a CBA (look it up) and have worked with about a half-dozen of them. Your understanding of the disorder is clearly lacking if you think it has ANYTHING to do with the meaning of typed phrases. Don't bother trying to tell me what I don't understand, I've been working with autistic and developmentally disabled kids for longer than you've been able to google, so I know more about it than you ever will.
If you planned on commenting on my POST, then I would have done that instead.
But to answer your question, CONTEXT. It worked in first grade, it'll work now.
"Get over yourself. Lots of people don't like the interface (its not really like firefox), its Javascript implementation (while getting better) is barely as good as IE and the fonts look terrible everytime I've tried to use it in Linux. Besides its not free as in speech or beer."
But then you say this
"So relax, there's no need for browser penis envy."
Slashdot Mirror
No, in a right to work state being fired is cause for you to lose your unemployment benefits.
There is no "without sufficient cause". You can be fired for any reason or NONE AT ALL.
"Why do so many bosses suck?"
Because it's the bosses job to make you do your job, and often people don't like to be made to do their jobs. There's your answer.
The rest of your post is just bitching.
Wow, you're the bitter one aren't you.
Do you genuinely think all successful bosses do those things? What a sad world you must live in.
Of course it's not possible someone works hard, and smart, and takes care of his employees. No, it must be through taking advantage of others that they earned their success.
Here, have a Haterade, it'll keep you hating all day long.
Check out "borderline personality disorder". It is often a diagnosis given to women, when they are truly psychopathic. And it's FAR more common in women.
"These traits aren't useful, they just don't get in the way of surviving (staying alive) and reproducing"
WRONG. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.
If I only have to commit minimal resources to reproduction (by conning my way into a females bed instead of marrying her) then leave to start again, such traits make me VERY successful at reproducing.
and I don't believe them. Flame away if you want, but the explanation doesn't answer all of my questions, and I'm still not convinced.
You know, I just realized what's going on here.
"Go back to college and take the appropriate physics and engineering courses that will teach you..."
You think you're smarter than people who disagree with you. That's just pathetic. Do you honestly believe that I DON'T understand the science involved, or are you just an arrogant asshole (yes, NOW I'm namecalling, but that's because you ARE an arrogant asshole) who thinks his intellect allows him to comment with more influence?
One last thing before I go. This is coming. YOU CAN'T STOP IT. And you'll never convince anyone by telling them to go back to school to take physics classes before they can discuss it with you, or by acting like a prick just because you think you have insight.
My vote counts the same as yours, and mine is for BPL, from now on. I hope you hear it when I'm downloading pictures of Paris Hilton's box on my BPL connection 5 years from now.
FIND ME ONE PLACE WHERE I CALLED YOU A NAME. Exactly. Now, however, I can say with certainty that you are a LIAR.
There's a reson I and other intelligent people hate this site.
I make several cogent points about BPL, many of which are in dispute, but NONE of which are FLAMEBAIT, and you motherfucking jackass mods mod me FLAMBAIT anyway.
Guess what assholes, I guarantee the first chance I get, I'm going to vote to allow BPL. Mod that flamebait you pathetic fuckers. I don't care anymore if it causes babies to explode and spew radiation.
At least I was willing to discuss the issue, and try to listen to honest points in both directions. You cocksuckers just mod it down if you don't like it.
Real world= real crime
Completely fake world= fake crime
If I were this guy I'd sue the shit out of everyone involved in the game for putting me in a position to get arrested.
Seriously, would you buy a game if you knew there was a very real chance of arrest just from playing?
"Well, then how about decades of established federal laws, regulations, and international treaties that establish the Amateur Radio Service as an internationally-recognized and licensed radio service, with primary access to most of their allocated radio spectrum, and secondary to the rest (after the military and some shortwave broadcasters)?"
And amazingly, NONE of that has to do with POSESSION or OWNERSHIP of the airwaves. You are LICENSED to use them, nothing more. And NO, none of your examples refute that in any way.
"You could say that our national highway system is "MY highways too," but that doesn't mean that you don't have to care about other users."
Dumb example. Nothing I can do on a highway is equivalent to the damage that can be done with a car, and arguing by analogy is just stupid to begin with.
"There is valid concern that the BPL systems that have been deployed so far are nowhere near compliant with Part 15. And there is also a good argument that Part 15 (intended for occasional and localized radiators like, say, microwave ovens) is not appropriate for something that is going to be ubiquitous and radiating significant amounts of radio frequency energy over broad swaths of spectrum all the time."
In other words, someone else is playing in your sandbox, and despite the fact that they aren't bothering you, you think they MIGHT bother you MAYBE at some point, so you get to kick them out of the sandbox entirely. Nope, doesn't work that way.
The wonderful thing about this discussion is that hams are making asses of themselves with their whining. It's pretty clear this is coming, and instead of developing solutons that help everyone, hams keep insisting that they have a perspective that should gice them greater influence. Nope, that doesn't go either.
"If we are experiencing interference, then many other radio services that use very similar technologies and frequencies are going to encounter the same kinds of interference."
And technology will adjust. It has before, so what make you think it won't this time, apart from your biases?
I understand your point, but there is a serious problem.
That is, amateur radio is a specialized hobby, which has a few (very rarely) useful qualities that other technologies lack.
Yes, it can be useful in emergencies (as I made clear in my original post) but that's really insignificant, and yes I DO mean insignificant. Being useful once in a blue moon is a poor reason to protect ham radio.
"So, it is not hard to see that if BPL is introduced in every community in the USA, this will make the HF spectrum mostly unusable for THE ENTIRE WORLD"
That is PURE speculation, and by attempting to prevent the development of BPL, you are actually stalling progress which could eliminate the interference.
"But they should have to do it over shielded cables"
Or alternately, I would love for hams to continue to have undisrupted access, but they should use equipment that works in less than ideal situations. Why are hams so eager to place the burden on the power companies? There is probably a great reason, but what I've heard is essentially "We were here first" or as you did "there is an incredibly small niche that is insignificant, but I can spin it to appear important". That won't fly.
Now, to address your very first sentence about what I should do. YOU should get on your ham radio and tell your friends to stop crybabying and come up with a solution. No one likes a whiner.
"If you can't process or retain any visual information, you're blind. Why does it matter if it's a low level or high level failure?"
:)
There is the seed of a good question here, but you're asking aobut two different things.
Processing the information must be studied separately, because VERY often your brain is capable of retaining information without conciously attending to it.
More importantly, I GUARANTEE the "blindness" in this study wouldn't appear if the visual information being ignored were more important that the emotion inducing event.
And just to be snotty, why bother trying to find out WHY this occurs, when you have clearly decided that the why isn't important, only that it happens.
Scientists everywhere take note, the WHY no longer matters! Once you show it happens, HOW it happens isn't important. Whew, that'll help me with my research for sure.
That is the appropriate name for this phenomenon, and it is well researched already.
Generalizing it to an emotion inducing event is pretty common sense stuff.
The airwaves were there before the hams, so by your logic, the hams actually belong to the airwaves.
"Well, that's the problem. Maybe we need a "sierra club" or "greenpeace" to act as watchdogs on our RF spectrum..."
I think the problem is that hams believe they have some type of "right of first refusal" that allows them disproportionate influence on decisions about radio spectrum.
That's a problem because they have skin in the game, so they're biased (but so is greenpeace and the sierra club) which makes thier opinions on the subject unreliable.
Why is introducing biodiversity where it doesn't exist (and hasn't for generations) a good idea? Apart from the feel good part of the plan, the very real dangers involved as well as the cost make this seem like a waste of time.
Great idea, completely impractical, and potentially irresponsible.
"They will oppose anything which further clouds their airwaves."
They are MY airwaves too. The fact that hams use them doesn't entitle them to decide HOW they are used.
If BPL is a solution that has a market (I'm skeptical) then it should be explored. And frankly, I couldn't care less what the hams have to say about it.
The emergency service problem however, that is a real issue that may kill BPL.
"Apparently, a major source of opposition to BPL is operators of ham radios"
Five guys in their basement constitutes "major opposition" these days.
"In terms of sheer wealth - the U.S. outstrips the vast majority of countries and there simply is no reason why the U.S. should ever take a back seat to technology - unless the moneyed interests demand otherwise."
Or the current tech is good enough, or the cost of implementation is FAR too high to justify (replacing copper with fiber for example). There are lots of reasons that have nothing to do with conspiracies against the working man.
"The U.S. doesn't have gasoline riots and it won't have broadband riots"
The cost of gasoline isn't high enough to justify such outrageous behavior. It costs me 80 dollars in a moderately efficient vehicle every month. That's a pittance, so why riot.
As far as the cost of broadband, what does someone NEED it for? Why would anyone risk life and limb for the opportunity to download choppy video at a cheap price?
Broadband is a luxury, THAT'S why you'll never see broadband riots. That, and the fact that the entire idea is ridiculous.
Perhaps YOU should do some reading on your own, then come back when you realize how silly this idea is.
Why should we try to give everyone broadband access when
1. They won't make any real use of it (most people fall into this category)
2. They're generally so lax about security that broadband would only make them more useful zombies.
3. Wired broadband is obsolete, and wi-max (or some version of wireless broadband) will solve the problem.
Well, if you wanted mytake on asperger's, you should have asked.
Especially since I am a CBA (look it up) and have worked with about a half-dozen of them. Your understanding of the disorder is clearly lacking if you think it has ANYTHING to do with the meaning of typed phrases. Don't bother trying to tell me what I don't understand, I've been working with autistic and developmentally disabled kids for longer than you've been able to google, so I know more about it than you ever will.
If you planned on commenting on my POST, then I would have done that instead.
But to answer your question, CONTEXT. It worked in first grade, it'll work now.
I claim you're a moron.
Or
I disagree, specifically because constructive criticism usually is given with the intention of improving the product.
Different. And not in anyone's MIND, but genuninely different.
Of course HE gets modded insightful...
First you say this
"Get over yourself. Lots of people don't like the interface (its not really like firefox), its Javascript implementation (while getting better) is barely as good as IE and the fonts look terrible everytime I've tried to use it in Linux. Besides its not free as in speech or beer."
But then you say this
"So relax, there's no need for browser penis envy."
Hmm, the hypocrisy is thick in here