The annoying part is that what the mob doesn't realize is that raising taxes on the rich will only get you so far. The spending has to stop. The house of cards will fall apart unless that happens. I don't believe raising the taxes on anybody is the answer, any economist will tell you that tax rate and tax revenue don't rise and fall with one another.
Good luck convincing the occupy movement of that. They throw around the 99% figure not realizing that the majority of Americans are the global 1%.
There's no war on immigrants in general, just those ones who don't offer anything of value and end up being a liability (which is the majority of those who come in illegally - Cubans being a notable exception.) H-1B immigrants are desirable. Illegal immigrants are not.
Although the French wrote "give me your poor" on the statue of liberty, that really isn't what you want. At least, not anymore due to "anchor baby" syndrome. The mere fact that somebody is born here automatically turns them into a citizen, and they automatically become eligible for welfare, food stamps, and better health care than the majority of Americans receive right now. Before these benefits existed, illegal immigration was more acceptable, but today it just costs us way too much.
Im not so sure about the marriage issue, but I do know quite well that single parent kids are far worse off, and our current welfare and child support laws encourage. Black people are especially bad here, not due to their race, but due to the cultural values (or lack thereof) of most urban black males. It's not society's fault, it's their own fault, but politicians and the media are so afraid of being labeled racist that nobody will speak up about it.
It's not necessarily that, but feel good issues as well. During the last election, there were attack ads from a democrat aimed at Jeff Flake (who is anti sopa) saying that he voted against veterans benefits. I don't recall the particular bill, but when I looked into it, it turned out that he voted against it due to numerous other provisions which had nothing at all to do with veterans.
It's of no consequence though, as he had overwhelming support of veterans (which includes me) in the actual election, but it just goes to show the absurd nature of earmarks (which, by the way, Jeff Flake has been aggressively trying to kill; another reason I support him.)
Personally I live less than 50 miles from the largest nuclear power facility in the US, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't know why it would bother anybody else either.
They're pretty much the same people who oppose wind turbines because they kill birds, and oppose solar panels because they use plastic. It's simultaneously these people who make the environmentalist movement less attractive to outsiders. Also, and this is some good irony for you, is that the people who tend to be anti-environmentalism also tend to favor nuclear power, which includes a lot of prominent republicans. They get shunned for that though, because it favors corporations who would profit from nuclear power.
You can't win with them no matter what you do, and they wonder why they have so many enemies.
I think what probably rubs people the wrong way is when those who spearhead the AGW movement either don't practice what they preach, or outright fabricate their "facts." Al Gore tells us that we all need to reduce our carbon footprint, yet he has a larger carbon footprint than dare I say 99% of the world's population. Further, he deliberately fabricated data in order to sell his "inconvenient truth" movie. As if that isn't enough, he sells carbon credits, aka "indulgences" to himself.
When you ask his supporters why he should be able to consume a lot while telling the rest of us not to, they insist that it's because he's an important person to get the word across (as if he's more important than anybody else on the planet no less.) That falls apart though when you think about the fact that his message is about as known as it can get, furthermore, most of his consumption comes from luxuries.
I would imagine that animals can't communicate any other conditions that they might have as a result of the process, but our technology to detect these problems either hasn't matured or doesn't exist. Take for example, having pain or numbness somewhere. Or maybe in things that most animals don't have, for example finer motor skills or higher order thought processes.
I suspect that cloning an octopus or a dolphin respectively could determine the practicability of those, but there are any number of other things that could be missed.
I don't know about the rest because I'm not really a developer, but I do agree that X is showing its age badly. All of the other major OSes have eliminated the problems of yore like tearing while moving windows, among other things.
I think Wayland looks interesting. Granted, it has given up the network driven portion of X, but it is far more modern both in terms of providing modern graphics functions as well as having a clean, glitch free rendering system.
Well said about virtual machines, I use vmware avidly for all sorts of stuff, and it allows guest OS'es to do pretty much anything the bare metal OS can do, unlike older generations.
Seriously, I don't know. I don't really use desktop linux, I mostly use it for servers and data forensics. Perhaps somebody could fill me in? And everybody else who doesn't know while they're at it.
Actually by some standards, midwestern American English more closely resembles British English of yore. We still fully enunciate our vowels and dipthongs in nearly all words, and we are still rhotic. The British today often truncate words as well, like saying "ceme-tree" instead of cemetary, and often exclude the t from many words, like saying wa'er instead of water.
It varies by region of course (both in the US and in England) but this holds true for the majority of speakers in the respective countries. (Or at least, the speakers that are most likely to get hired in upper scale jobs and call centers. Speak of call centers, eastern call centers prefer to emulate American midwestern over all other accents, including British, even when they service England.)
These annoying things that they had back when I was a teenager. Go watch shows on hulu, they still have them there, and unlike a DVR you can't skip them. And even if you pay them money, you still have to watch them and can't see less of them.
The spammers have found various ways around these. Often they throw a bunch of the "high target" key words (e.g. viagra, cialis, penis enlargement) in as images, or they'll use computer generated text that looks somewhat real enough to even fool some human readers in order to throw off those filters. This works because the more words you have, the less likely the small terms will be snagged.
If a store asks you to leave, you have to leave, no matter the reason. It's private property. That's like you inviting somebody to your house, and then they do something to piss you off, so you ask them to leave, and they refuse to. What do you do? Call the cops. If that person still refuses to leave, they just might get tazered.
That's a great idea actually. This is going to sound controversial, but hear me out before rushing to judgement: Taxing corporations puts a higher burden on the poor than the wealthy. In spite of what many believe, corporations don't pay taxes no matter how high you make the tax rate, and no matter how much you legislate away tax havens. All they do is push that expense on to the consumer by raising prices, from the food you buy to the gadgets you buy.
Now how does that effect the poor more? Well, by throwing those extra prices on them, it increases their costs, and lowers their standard of living because their purchasing power is reduced. It also might effect employee wages as well.
If you get rid of corporate income tax you and simply treat capital gains as regular income, you kill two birds with one stone: you make warren buffet happy, and the poor have more purchasing power. In addition, if it increases employee wages (that one is debatable) then you may see no net effect on revenue because they would be paying more taxes, as would the investors.
I'm a bit biased though as I'm strongly libertarian. I recognize that the state needs revenue, but I believe the economy does best when government simply gets out of the way. Many on slashdot would probably agree with that if they realized that it is not the corporations who can put you in jail or forcibly take your money away for copyright infringement, but it is the government that does both (in the case of money, they forcibly deprive you of it and hand it over to them.) It is also the government who makes absurd patent laws. Granted corporations can lobby for these, they ultimately don't write the law.
It's up to you to vote for politicians who agree with you. Don't vote for the party, don't vote for the guy with the "cool dude" attitude, and if somebody says "I'm voting for x because my friends are" or "I'm voting for him because I like seeing an (insert minority or sexual orientation here) in office". If they say that, kindly ask them to not vote unless they take the time to learn about the issues, and see if they like what they are. Don't indoctrinate them either, don't push them towards your view. Just tell them to vote consciously, not blindly, or else don't vote at all. Also, abandon the left vs right politics, it's all bullshit.
Regardless, microsoft has an API specifically for this purpose, and if you read the discussions here, one of the lead samba developers has had extensive contact with both Microsoft engineers and sales people, and they all enthusiastically support it.
Consider making your posts less wordy btw, it was WOT TL,DR.
I'm on cable. Last month I downloaded over a terabyte on usenet. So far I'm at 530 gigs this month.
I have to ask though, can your DSL even download fast enough to even reach where I've hit in only 11 days? I am not downloading 24/7, I just pick up full blu-ray images of movies (40 to 50 gigs each) and tv shows in high def (typically 1.5-2.5 gigs a pop) on usenet.
FWIW it takes me 3 hours to download 50 gigs, and 10 minutes to download 2.5 gigs (those numbers are rough - sometimes RAR's are damaged and they have to be re-downloaded, that is the nature of usenet regardless of your pipe.)
You remind me of this discussion I once had here on slashdot.
My point? Well, there's nothing for them to really copyright or sue over, as GP conjectured.
Also, they fully comply with those standards (and DNS too, by the way.) When I say mostly, I mean they have added some things beyond those, like forests, FSMO, GPO's, and others.
Seriously unless you've been under a rock, that's like asking somebody to cite the first amendment. As for the part you quoted, of course he wasn't saying that actually happened, so why on earth would he cite anything? He was speaking hypothetically of what could happen if they decided to do the same thing that the US currently does. Read the summary, and read what he replied to. You wonder why you ere modded troll and he was modded 5? Take a harder look, and admit when you're wrong. Also learn the proper use of the word "irony."
Also, Obama can't "refuse" to renew the Brady bill, namely because it has no sunset to begin with, and Obama DID outright say he wants to bam assault rifles. As for the national parks, he only signed that because it was attached to a credit card consumer protection bill.
Slashdot Mirror
The annoying part is that what the mob doesn't realize is that raising taxes on the rich will only get you so far. The spending has to stop. The house of cards will fall apart unless that happens. I don't believe raising the taxes on anybody is the answer, any economist will tell you that tax rate and tax revenue don't rise and fall with one another.
Good luck convincing the occupy movement of that. They throw around the 99% figure not realizing that the majority of Americans are the global 1%.
There's no war on immigrants in general, just those ones who don't offer anything of value and end up being a liability (which is the majority of those who come in illegally - Cubans being a notable exception.) H-1B immigrants are desirable. Illegal immigrants are not.
Although the French wrote "give me your poor" on the statue of liberty, that really isn't what you want. At least, not anymore due to "anchor baby" syndrome. The mere fact that somebody is born here automatically turns them into a citizen, and they automatically become eligible for welfare, food stamps, and better health care than the majority of Americans receive right now. Before these benefits existed, illegal immigration was more acceptable, but today it just costs us way too much.
Actually, a lack of money doesn't cause crime. Just look at India if you don't believe me, they're quite literally the happiest people on earth.
Indeed, does welfare reduce crime? No, in fact, it actually increases it.
http://www.neoperspectives.com/welfare.htm
Im not so sure about the marriage issue, but I do know quite well that single parent kids are far worse off, and our current welfare and child support laws encourage. Black people are especially bad here, not due to their race, but due to the cultural values (or lack thereof) of most urban black males. It's not society's fault, it's their own fault, but politicians and the media are so afraid of being labeled racist that nobody will speak up about it.
Maritime law dictates that anybody who is aware of piracy has to intervene to stop it if they have the means, no matter what flag the victim flies.
Well in that context, you forgot to say wigger and sandnigger.
It's not necessarily that, but feel good issues as well. During the last election, there were attack ads from a democrat aimed at Jeff Flake (who is anti sopa) saying that he voted against veterans benefits. I don't recall the particular bill, but when I looked into it, it turned out that he voted against it due to numerous other provisions which had nothing at all to do with veterans.
It's of no consequence though, as he had overwhelming support of veterans (which includes me) in the actual election, but it just goes to show the absurd nature of earmarks (which, by the way, Jeff Flake has been aggressively trying to kill; another reason I support him.)
What other side?
Personally I live less than 50 miles from the largest nuclear power facility in the US, and it doesn't bother me in the slightest. I don't know why it would bother anybody else either.
They're pretty much the same people who oppose wind turbines because they kill birds, and oppose solar panels because they use plastic. It's simultaneously these people who make the environmentalist movement less attractive to outsiders. Also, and this is some good irony for you, is that the people who tend to be anti-environmentalism also tend to favor nuclear power, which includes a lot of prominent republicans. They get shunned for that though, because it favors corporations who would profit from nuclear power.
You can't win with them no matter what you do, and they wonder why they have so many enemies.
I think what probably rubs people the wrong way is when those who spearhead the AGW movement either don't practice what they preach, or outright fabricate their "facts." Al Gore tells us that we all need to reduce our carbon footprint, yet he has a larger carbon footprint than dare I say 99% of the world's population. Further, he deliberately fabricated data in order to sell his "inconvenient truth" movie. As if that isn't enough, he sells carbon credits, aka "indulgences" to himself.
When you ask his supporters why he should be able to consume a lot while telling the rest of us not to, they insist that it's because he's an important person to get the word across (as if he's more important than anybody else on the planet no less.) That falls apart though when you think about the fact that his message is about as known as it can get, furthermore, most of his consumption comes from luxuries.
I would imagine that animals can't communicate any other conditions that they might have as a result of the process, but our technology to detect these problems either hasn't matured or doesn't exist. Take for example, having pain or numbness somewhere. Or maybe in things that most animals don't have, for example finer motor skills or higher order thought processes.
I suspect that cloning an octopus or a dolphin respectively could determine the practicability of those, but there are any number of other things that could be missed.
I don't know about the rest because I'm not really a developer, but I do agree that X is showing its age badly. All of the other major OSes have eliminated the problems of yore like tearing while moving windows, among other things.
I think Wayland looks interesting. Granted, it has given up the network driven portion of X, but it is far more modern both in terms of providing modern graphics functions as well as having a clean, glitch free rendering system.
Well said about virtual machines, I use vmware avidly for all sorts of stuff, and it allows guest OS'es to do pretty much anything the bare metal OS can do, unlike older generations.
Seriously, I don't know. I don't really use desktop linux, I mostly use it for servers and data forensics. Perhaps somebody could fill me in? And everybody else who doesn't know while they're at it.
Actually by some standards, midwestern American English more closely resembles British English of yore. We still fully enunciate our vowels and dipthongs in nearly all words, and we are still rhotic. The British today often truncate words as well, like saying "ceme-tree" instead of cemetary, and often exclude the t from many words, like saying wa'er instead of water.
It varies by region of course (both in the US and in England) but this holds true for the majority of speakers in the respective countries. (Or at least, the speakers that are most likely to get hired in upper scale jobs and call centers. Speak of call centers, eastern call centers prefer to emulate American midwestern over all other accents, including British, even when they service England.)
These annoying things that they had back when I was a teenager. Go watch shows on hulu, they still have them there, and unlike a DVR you can't skip them. And even if you pay them money, you still have to watch them and can't see less of them.
The spammers have found various ways around these. Often they throw a bunch of the "high target" key words (e.g. viagra, cialis, penis enlargement) in as images, or they'll use computer generated text that looks somewhat real enough to even fool some human readers in order to throw off those filters. This works because the more words you have, the less likely the small terms will be snagged.
That's "hear hear", as in "hear him, hear him!" (which is where that phrase is rooted.)
If a store asks you to leave, you have to leave, no matter the reason. It's private property. That's like you inviting somebody to your house, and then they do something to piss you off, so you ask them to leave, and they refuse to. What do you do? Call the cops. If that person still refuses to leave, they just might get tazered.
That's a great idea actually. This is going to sound controversial, but hear me out before rushing to judgement: Taxing corporations puts a higher burden on the poor than the wealthy. In spite of what many believe, corporations don't pay taxes no matter how high you make the tax rate, and no matter how much you legislate away tax havens. All they do is push that expense on to the consumer by raising prices, from the food you buy to the gadgets you buy.
Now how does that effect the poor more? Well, by throwing those extra prices on them, it increases their costs, and lowers their standard of living because their purchasing power is reduced. It also might effect employee wages as well.
If you get rid of corporate income tax you and simply treat capital gains as regular income, you kill two birds with one stone: you make warren buffet happy, and the poor have more purchasing power. In addition, if it increases employee wages (that one is debatable) then you may see no net effect on revenue because they would be paying more taxes, as would the investors.
I'm a bit biased though as I'm strongly libertarian. I recognize that the state needs revenue, but I believe the economy does best when government simply gets out of the way. Many on slashdot would probably agree with that if they realized that it is not the corporations who can put you in jail or forcibly take your money away for copyright infringement, but it is the government that does both (in the case of money, they forcibly deprive you of it and hand it over to them.) It is also the government who makes absurd patent laws. Granted corporations can lobby for these, they ultimately don't write the law.
It's up to you to vote for politicians who agree with you. Don't vote for the party, don't vote for the guy with the "cool dude" attitude, and if somebody says "I'm voting for x because my friends are" or "I'm voting for him because I like seeing an (insert minority or sexual orientation here) in office". If they say that, kindly ask them to not vote unless they take the time to learn about the issues, and see if they like what they are. Don't indoctrinate them either, don't push them towards your view. Just tell them to vote consciously, not blindly, or else don't vote at all. Also, abandon the left vs right politics, it's all bullshit.
They do it deliberately to catch your attention. I imagine that surveys say it works, otherwise they probably wouldn't.
This legislation is about 10 years too late though, I stopped watching commercials a very long time ago.
Maybe they intend to be able to clean up each edition of the big book of British smiles much easier each time it is released.
Regardless, microsoft has an API specifically for this purpose, and if you read the discussions here, one of the lead samba developers has had extensive contact with both Microsoft engineers and sales people, and they all enthusiastically support it.
Consider making your posts less wordy btw, it was WOT TL,DR.
I'm on cable. Last month I downloaded over a terabyte on usenet. So far I'm at 530 gigs this month.
I have to ask though, can your DSL even download fast enough to even reach where I've hit in only 11 days? I am not downloading 24/7, I just pick up full blu-ray images of movies (40 to 50 gigs each) and tv shows in high def (typically 1.5-2.5 gigs a pop) on usenet.
FWIW it takes me 3 hours to download 50 gigs, and 10 minutes to download 2.5 gigs (those numbers are rough - sometimes RAR's are damaged and they have to be re-downloaded, that is the nature of usenet regardless of your pipe.)
You remind me of this discussion I once had here on slashdot.
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3250133&cid=41981547
My point? Well, there's nothing for them to really copyright or sue over, as GP conjectured.
Also, they fully comply with those standards (and DNS too, by the way.) When I say mostly, I mean they have added some things beyond those, like forests, FSMO, GPO's, and others.
You said this:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3306563&cid=42244709
Which was in reply to this:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3306563&cid=42243221
And then I replied to you.
Seriously unless you've been under a rock, that's like asking somebody to cite the first amendment. As for the part you quoted, of course he wasn't saying that actually happened, so why on earth would he cite anything? He was speaking hypothetically of what could happen if they decided to do the same thing that the US currently does. Read the summary, and read what he replied to. You wonder why you ere modded troll and he was modded 5? Take a harder look, and admit when you're wrong. Also learn the proper use of the word "irony."
Also, Obama can't "refuse" to renew the Brady bill, namely because it has no sunset to begin with, and Obama DID outright say he wants to bam assault rifles. As for the national parks, he only signed that because it was attached to a credit card consumer protection bill.