My bank has pretty decent security - after logging in with a very long string of numbers & password combination, to do anything with the bank accounts one must use a TAN generator into which they place their card, then place it on the screen in order to generate the TAN itself, which is typed back.
You sound like a grumpy old man. Seriously. It's like the wonder has died in your heart, and all that's left is a sour husk upset with the changes unfolding around him, desperately lashing out in a vain attempt to regain some sense of control by putting down the things which will exist long after he, and every single memory of him, will have evaporated without anyone noticing.
It's dismissed because it's arguably the worst source for training. We already have a good enough understanding of physics and human behaviour to take the frequently-skewed understanding of drivers into account. When most drivers think they're above average, it's clear something pretty irrational is happening. It's terribly sad that you think drivers are the best source of understanding of safe driving. Hubris, perhaps?
Not safe compared to anything which isn't a motorcycle. If it wasn't so familiar, people would realise that driving is inherently dangerous, and the major cause of that danger is the driver and their limited senses (which did not evolve to drive cars, but run around savannahs and jungles and so on).
It's not weird in the slightest, as this isn't about selling phones, but abusing market position. Why are you so desperate to defend Google? It can't just be ignorance...
Judging by the demonstrated amount of illusory superiority exhibited by drivers, that might not be a great idea. The problem is most drivers think they're better than they actually are.
It's not particularly safe, though, plus each accident costs more than just the damage to the car(s) involved. The US attitude towards public transport definitely doesn't help people to use trains and buses.
But I guess if you just ignore reality, your stance is rather intelligent!
It's only a problem for people who care about OSS stuff, and it's not a lock-in if you can just switch out your card. If you are doing anything more involved than simply running a few cards in gaming PCs (such as GPU clusters, etc.) you will likely have a contract which covers everything you need.
Segways are the mobility scooter for lazy people. Admit it, and everyone will leave you alone. You are lazy - that's fine, just don't pretend you're making a rational case.
A country being a republic or not has absolutely nothing to do with being a democracy. And being federal also has nothing to do with being a democracy. These are orthogonal notions - a republic simply means a country without a hereditary or dynastic leader. It can be a democracy, or a dictatorship, or anything in between. A federal republic means simply a group of republics cooperating on common matters of interest while governing their own internal affairs - again, it has nothing to do with democracy. One could have a federal dictatorship, if one really wanted. Hell, there are non-republics which are democracies (Britain is a good example). Why do so many people have such difficulties with these words? The concepts are childishly easy to grasp. Why you got a +4 for telling everyone you don't know what those words means is beyond me:)
The phrase you are probably looking for is "representative democracy".
It's not that difficult - just look at what the religion does for the people. If it offers honest services to non-members (care homes, hospices, daycare, blah blah), that's a good sign. If it simply wants to amass property and fleece its flock, that might not help. That's just one aspect of what a religion can do for society.
Those other religions don't systematically build up a file on you through the guise of off-brand psychoanalysis while a member, and use it to ruin your life when you leave. They also don't attempt to frame their ex-members for bank robberies or sexual assault, or have official policies of "fair game", or "R2-45" (where you are "audited" by being shot in the head - LRH wrote that one himself). You seem to be toning down (no pun intended) what Scientology routinely does as a matter of standard practice, and demonizing (also no pun intended) outlying behaviour far less violent and aggressive.
If you find yourself being more anal about rules than your average German, something incredibly wrong is happening, and you should seek medical attention immediately.
Germany only gives the tax-exempt status to religions which perform good for the people. Scientology definitely does not, and in fact, its entire business model is predicated on doing precisely the opposite. A religion which charges hundreds of thousands in order to read its texts and find out what the religion (of which you are already a member) is not a religion.
There is something wrong about investigating a large company whose non-related business practices are capable of influencing untold markets? The horror!
You are just guessing, it seems. There is no evidence to suggest these different organisations are all in cahoots to overturn Google. Plus, them having a monopoly doesn't matter - it's about abusing their position in the market. They just have to be sufficiently large to abuse that position, way before becoming a monopoly.
You don't seem to understand what this is about. If Google hurts a business's page rank because of some business practice, the general public who resoundingly do use Google will not find said business as quickly (or at all), meaning Google can skew an entire market if it wanted to, as long as it did it quietly enough to not scare people off from using Google.
Slashdot Mirror
I usually respect your opinions on the topics I see you comment on, but this really is just a bad case of getoffmylawnitis.
Of course they overwhelmingly hate it there - people don't go to the support forums to say "It's great - thanks!" and leave.
Personally I have no problem with it, as seems to be the case with most people.
My bank has pretty decent security - after logging in with a very long string of numbers & password combination, to do anything with the bank accounts one must use a TAN generator into which they place their card, then place it on the screen in order to generate the TAN itself, which is typed back.
You sound like a grumpy old man. Seriously. It's like the wonder has died in your heart, and all that's left is a sour husk upset with the changes unfolding around him, desperately lashing out in a vain attempt to regain some sense of control by putting down the things which will exist long after he, and every single memory of him, will have evaporated without anyone noticing.
Grow up. You sound worse than the feminazis.
It's dismissed because it's arguably the worst source for training. We already have a good enough understanding of physics and human behaviour to take the frequently-skewed understanding of drivers into account. When most drivers think they're above average, it's clear something pretty irrational is happening. It's terribly sad that you think drivers are the best source of understanding of safe driving. Hubris, perhaps?
Not safe compared to anything which isn't a motorcycle. If it wasn't so familiar, people would realise that driving is inherently dangerous, and the major cause of that danger is the driver and their limited senses (which did not evolve to drive cars, but run around savannahs and jungles and so on).
The logic has already been figured out, and a computerised version would be far simpler to use, and just as effective.
It's not weird in the slightest, as this isn't about selling phones, but abusing market position. Why are you so desperate to defend Google? It can't just be ignorance...
Judging by the demonstrated amount of illusory superiority exhibited by drivers, that might not be a great idea. The problem is most drivers think they're better than they actually are.
It's not particularly safe, though, plus each accident costs more than just the damage to the car(s) involved. The US attitude towards public transport definitely doesn't help people to use trains and buses.
But I guess if you just ignore reality, your stance is rather intelligent!
It's only a problem for people who care about OSS stuff, and it's not a lock-in if you can just switch out your card. If you are doing anything more involved than simply running a few cards in gaming PCs (such as GPU clusters, etc.) you will likely have a contract which covers everything you need.
Segways are the mobility scooter for lazy people. Admit it, and everyone will leave you alone. You are lazy - that's fine, just don't pretend you're making a rational case.
Maybe if the city involved has terrible public transport, and/or you are incredibly out of shape. 10km in a morning walk? That's trivial.
This is a massive part of what's screwed up with US politics - this perverse idea that money = speech.
A country being a republic or not has absolutely nothing to do with being a democracy. And being federal also has nothing to do with being a democracy. These are orthogonal notions - a republic simply means a country without a hereditary or dynastic leader. It can be a democracy, or a dictatorship, or anything in between. A federal republic means simply a group of republics cooperating on common matters of interest while governing their own internal affairs - again, it has nothing to do with democracy. One could have a federal dictatorship, if one really wanted. Hell, there are non-republics which are democracies (Britain is a good example). Why do so many people have such difficulties with these words? The concepts are childishly easy to grasp. Why you got a +4 for telling everyone you don't know what those words means is beyond me :)
The phrase you are probably looking for is "representative democracy".
You might want to brush up on your history...
It's not that difficult - just look at what the religion does for the people. If it offers honest services to non-members (care homes, hospices, daycare, blah blah), that's a good sign. If it simply wants to amass property and fleece its flock, that might not help. That's just one aspect of what a religion can do for society.
Those other religions don't systematically build up a file on you through the guise of off-brand psychoanalysis while a member, and use it to ruin your life when you leave. They also don't attempt to frame their ex-members for bank robberies or sexual assault, or have official policies of "fair game", or "R2-45" (where you are "audited" by being shot in the head - LRH wrote that one himself). You seem to be toning down (no pun intended) what Scientology routinely does as a matter of standard practice, and demonizing (also no pun intended) outlying behaviour far less violent and aggressive.
If you find yourself being more anal about rules than your average German, something incredibly wrong is happening, and you should seek medical attention immediately.
Germany only gives the tax-exempt status to religions which perform good for the people. Scientology definitely does not, and in fact, its entire business model is predicated on doing precisely the opposite. A religion which charges hundreds of thousands in order to read its texts and find out what the religion (of which you are already a member) is not a religion.
There is something wrong about investigating a large company whose non-related business practices are capable of influencing untold markets? The horror!
Christ not that old nonsense again. You are the customer, even if money doesn't change hands.
You are just guessing, it seems. There is no evidence to suggest these different organisations are all in cahoots to overturn Google. Plus, them having a monopoly doesn't matter - it's about abusing their position in the market. They just have to be sufficiently large to abuse that position, way before becoming a monopoly.
You don't seem to understand what this is about. If Google hurts a business's page rank because of some business practice, the general public who resoundingly do use Google will not find said business as quickly (or at all), meaning Google can skew an entire market if it wanted to, as long as it did it quietly enough to not scare people off from using Google.