Mossberg is a tech journalist for the Wall Street Times. He's famous for always giving very favorable reviews to Apple products, so this is somewhat of a departure for him.
Man, I have the same problem at Quiznos. It's just easier for everyone involved when I order a "For Here, Regular Classic Italian, On Wheat, No Vegetables Except Lettuce", and then stare menacingly at the staff to make sure they get it right. (FACT: They always do. And if I didn't specify all of that at once they would ask me, "is that for here or to go?" "What size?" "Which sandwich?" "White bread or wheat?" "Olives and tomatoes?" I hear Starbucks does the same thing if you just try to order coffee.)
In poker, there is no house. The pro poker players are the main ones concerned with this--internet poker used to be a profitable living for some people.
This is just like in school when the whole class got punished for something that one guy did. And then we beat up that one guy. Come to think of it that actually worked!
If you are in the U.S. and you download from Antigua, I'd bet my left nut that Uncle Sam will come knocking on your door for violation of U.S. law.
Honestly, I've been waiting for years for them to do that over certain torrents I've downloaded from hosts around the world using a tracker in Sweden. Copyright is unenforced and unenforceable. All that's going on here is, we can host the servers in Antigua and no one can shut them down.
I wasn't citing them as proof, I was citing them to avoid repeating myself--something I told you two posts ago. Until you improve your reading comprehension, though, I think the Federalist Papers will remain somewhat beyond you.
There is no false dichotomy, read the Federalist Papers and the Constitution yourself.
I have. (I'm also well aware that the Federalist Papers were written for an era and in an era where women and blacks could not vote, and neither could anyone who didn't own any land--if you are seriously advocating returning to that system then please say so openly.) The meanings of words change over time. "Democracy" is one of these words, and the use of the term "democracy" to refer to elected representative governments is well-attested, especially when those governments allow suffrage to all adult citizens, as ours does. At the same time, "representative democracy" is distinguished from "republic"--Great Britain is one, but not the other. The question of which is left as an exercise to the reader.
No, the gist of my argument is, "you're setting up a false dichotomy." The self-referencing is only because I loathe repeating myself. And the gist of your argument is, "no it isn't, you neocon fascist, here's a link".
"Democracy", in the way that most actual people use the word today, is a term that applies to the American system of government. Now, it is true that this country wasn't much of a democracy when it was founded, since only male landowners could vote. But successive years of reforms changed that. If you'd bothered following my links (which, incidentally, is good form if you're going to provide links of your own), you'd have found this comment I made awhile back:
Considering that America is both a democracy *and* a constitutional republic, evidently neither do you. A democracy is any system in which the population at large controls (in theory, is) the government. A constitutional system is one in which a specific set of rules, known as the "constitution", limits the authority of the government. A republic is any system of government where (a) there is no monarchy and (b) government officials are supposed to represent some subset of the population.
Nineteenth-century America is an example of an undemocratic republic--only male landowners could vote originally, though by the current day all adult citizens can vote. Current-day Britain is an example of a democratic, constitutional monarchy--while it is not a republic, there is still an (unwritten) constitution limiting the monarchy (otherwise it would be an absolute monarchy), and democracy exists.
Furthermore...
Not that I blame you, you appear to believe what the neocons want you to believe and all.
Something tells me I'm going to have to add "neocon" to the list of words that have completely lost their meaning. The idea that America is, or should be a democracy dates back to the 19th century, long before neocons even existed.
Oh, so you think then that the US is a pure democracy? Or that a few democratic features make a democracy? Sorry, you'd best brush up on your poli sci.
You're the one that needs brushing up. The US is a democracy. The US is also a constitutional republic. The US is not, however, a direct democracy. Not all democracies are direct democracies. Furthermore, I've gone through this routine three or four different times this month alone.
You didn't follow my link, nor do you know what a "canard" is, do you? There's no conflict between being a democracy and being a constitutional republic--it's people like you who spread misunderstanding and ignorance that I'm sick of.
But I must offer one small correction, the US is not a democracy -- it's a "democratic republic", a form of representative government which incorporates some features of a democracy.
Okay, I will. As far as I can tell, there's no law stopping me from making my own adaptation of those old fairy tales, so long as I don't steal Disney's artwork and script. Similarly, if the Egyptians built a new pyramid, copyrighted the blueprints, and patented some new construction technique, there would be nothing stopping me from building a pyramid using my own updates on the ancient design.
No - the whole point was that golf, like any other sport*, is a measurement of how good at it a human being can get without any help of the chemical variety - they're measuring the man, not the chemicals he used to get the win.
How far are you really willing to take this? Athletes use nutritional science to optimize their performance. For instance, marathon runners, leading up to a marathon, will carb-load (go on a low-carb diet for a few weeks and then gorge themselves on spaghetti the night before the marathon) to maximize their glycogen storage. Athletes devise (or have their trainers devise for them) exercise strategies that push their ability to the limit. Injured football players often use painkillers to help play through injuries. Golfers and baseball players often get LASIK surgery to enhance their vision beyond 20/20. At what point does it become cheating?
Slashdot Mirror
Yeah, I was bound to make some mistake somewhere.
Mossberg is a tech journalist for the Wall Street Times. He's famous for always giving very favorable reviews to Apple products, so this is somewhat of a departure for him.
Isn't it obvious? Mossberg is shaking down Apple to come out with a new iMac and send him a review unit.
Man, I have the same problem at Quiznos. It's just easier for everyone involved when I order a "For Here, Regular Classic Italian, On Wheat, No Vegetables Except Lettuce", and then stare menacingly at the staff to make sure they get it right. (FACT: They always do. And if I didn't specify all of that at once they would ask me, "is that for here or to go?" "What size?" "Which sandwich?" "White bread or wheat?" "Olives and tomatoes?" I hear Starbucks does the same thing if you just try to order coffee.)
In poker, there is no house. The pro poker players are the main ones concerned with this--internet poker used to be a profitable living for some people.
This is just like in school when the whole class got punished for something that one guy did. And then we beat up that one guy. Come to think of it that actually worked!
Honestly, I've been waiting for years for them to do that over certain torrents I've downloaded from hosts around the world using a tracker in Sweden. Copyright is unenforced and unenforceable. All that's going on here is, we can host the servers in Antigua and no one can shut them down.
Either online gambling is legalized and we win, or we can legally download movies, music, and software from Antigua, and we win. Huzzah for the WTO!
I wasn't citing them as proof, I was citing them to avoid repeating myself--something I told you two posts ago. Until you improve your reading comprehension, though, I think the Federalist Papers will remain somewhat beyond you.
I have. (I'm also well aware that the Federalist Papers were written for an era and in an era where women and blacks could not vote, and neither could anyone who didn't own any land--if you are seriously advocating returning to that system then please say so openly.) The meanings of words change over time. "Democracy" is one of these words, and the use of the term "democracy" to refer to elected representative governments is well-attested, especially when those governments allow suffrage to all adult citizens, as ours does. At the same time, "representative democracy" is distinguished from "republic"--Great Britain is one, but not the other. The question of which is left as an exercise to the reader.
No, the gist of my argument is, "you're setting up a false dichotomy." The self-referencing is only because I loathe repeating myself. And the gist of your argument is, "no it isn't, you neocon fascist, here's a link".
"Democracy", in the way that most actual people use the word today, is a term that applies to the American system of government. Now, it is true that this country wasn't much of a democracy when it was founded, since only male landowners could vote. But successive years of reforms changed that. If you'd bothered following my links (which, incidentally, is good form if you're going to provide links of your own), you'd have found this comment I made awhile back:
Considering that America is both a democracy *and* a constitutional republic, evidently neither do you. A democracy is any system in which the population at large controls (in theory, is) the government. A constitutional system is one in which a specific set of rules, known as the "constitution", limits the authority of the government. A republic is any system of government where (a) there is no monarchy and (b) government officials are supposed to represent some subset of the population.
Nineteenth-century America is an example of an undemocratic republic--only male landowners could vote originally, though by the current day all adult citizens can vote. Current-day Britain is an example of a democratic, constitutional monarchy--while it is not a republic, there is still an (unwritten) constitution limiting the monarchy (otherwise it would be an absolute monarchy), and democracy exists.
Furthermore...
Not that I blame you, you appear to believe what the neocons want you to believe and all.Something tells me I'm going to have to add "neocon" to the list of words that have completely lost their meaning. The idea that America is, or should be a democracy dates back to the 19th century, long before neocons even existed.
Given that the topic of hand is semantics, I'm wondering what kind of argument is better. Perhaps we should discuss football instead?
You're the one that needs brushing up. The US is a democracy. The US is also a constitutional republic. The US is not, however, a direct democracy. Not all democracies are direct democracies. Furthermore, I've gone through this routine three or four different times this month alone.
You didn't follow my link, nor do you know what a "canard" is, do you? There's no conflict between being a democracy and being a constitutional republic--it's people like you who spread misunderstanding and ignorance that I'm sick of.
In a world of takeout and TV dinners, Hamburger Helper is a step up.
That canard is getting old.
Man, I'm just always relieved it isn't 2 girls 1 cup.
20 cents? Your opinion's worth ten times as much as ours?
Okay, I will. As far as I can tell, there's no law stopping me from making my own adaptation of those old fairy tales, so long as I don't steal Disney's artwork and script. Similarly, if the Egyptians built a new pyramid, copyrighted the blueprints, and patented some new construction technique, there would be nothing stopping me from building a pyramid using my own updates on the ancient design.
Everything on your computer is a number. And yet most of it is copyrighted. Ah ha!
That was sublicensed from the Masons.
Didn't you see Terminator 3? Judgment day is inevitable. Google is building Skynet.
How far are you really willing to take this? Athletes use nutritional science to optimize their performance. For instance, marathon runners, leading up to a marathon, will carb-load (go on a low-carb diet for a few weeks and then gorge themselves on spaghetti the night before the marathon) to maximize their glycogen storage. Athletes devise (or have their trainers devise for them) exercise strategies that push their ability to the limit. Injured football players often use painkillers to help play through injuries. Golfers and baseball players often get LASIK surgery to enhance their vision beyond 20/20. At what point does it become cheating?
Dude, why bother with the TV at that point? Just use the drugs. That's what it comes down to.