They didn't have a valid point. The car did not run out of power. The show portrayed the car begin pushed, as i if it actually had. That may not have been an explicit lie (i mean, you can push a car that's full of gas, too), but it sure as shit is a misleading, asshole move. The car, fully charged, will get you over 300 miles, as I understand it, though less so at very high speeds. It can fast charge in an hour or so to 80%, which isn't so bad, even long distance. In a pinch you can charge it off a regular power outlet, though that takes a lot longer. The point being that unless you're trying very hard and ignoring the car's very clear warnings, it will not leave you stranded any more than a gas car will.
That depends. Some lawyers are willing to take defense cases on a contingent fee basis. I was sued once for defamation. Because the case was filed in a state where there were strong anti-SLAPP laws, my, normally 500/hr lawyers took the case for (mostly) free with a relatively small retainer. They were so confident the case was bs, had no chance of winning, and that they could get paid through the anti-SLAPP statute, they were willing to take the small risk of losing. The case ended up costing the plaintiff probably close to half a million by the time the dust settled (the judge even granted them a 1.5x multiplier for their risk). The point is there are lawyers out there who are willing to take these sorts of cases if there are statutes out there that will allow them to get paid. I think this sounds like a good law, even for the small guys.
One solid defense is that there is no case unless they disclose it to a third party, which they will not. If you did, then you would consent to the publication.
So far as I know the newer intel integrated gpus all have hardware h264 encoding and decoding built in so full motion video shouldn't be a problem. Benchmarks also indicate the 3d performance isn't horrible, although still not what you'd get from a dedicated solution. For a notebook where battery life is more important than performance, it's a good choice.
Will the publisher of WoG release a Unity optimized arm *Linux* version to satisfy all of the 10 people who will use Ubuntu Tablet? To get those users there first, you need apps. So you need Android compatibility.
Google hasn't interfered with the Play Store running on things like Cyanogen Mod, as long as it's not bundled. Why would they do it here? Besides: Amazon has an android app store. What's preventing them from selling apps directly to Ubuntu users? It would benefit both Ubuntu and Amazon by having such a compatibility layer. It would be even nicer if Google could partner with Canonical so searching for an app through the lenses would yield results for both stores. Users could choose the cheaper price.
I suspect it's more to do with not wanting to rape the tablet's flash memory with a swap partition, and wanting users to be able to run more than a few apps at a time. I wouldn't worry too much about it, though. I'm sure in time there will be custom Ubuntu roms built for all sorts of other devices. Personally, i'm hoping for Nexus 7, which has 1GB of ram.
None of those solutions, so far as has been said, will be set up or bundled with Ubuntu Desktop. I get there is almost always a way to do something in Linux, but that won't matter if it isn't already set up when a person buys a tablet. They want to click on the Google Play store (or perhaps search these through a lens, which I find very cool) and download apps. If there is going to be any significant adoption of Ubuntu desktop, this needs to be bundled in, even if means paying the "Google Tax". Even Amazon's android app store would work. At the absolute minimum, it needs to be able to run.apks out of the box so a person can install a market and those apps need to be treated as equal citizens. Otherwise it'll be a niche rom that nobody outside of a very small technical circle will ever flash and will likely stagnate and die, which I would hate to see as from the video, the interface looks like a nice mix of some of the best tablet UIs so far, with some very creative additions.
You miss my point, which is that while plenty of linux apps already exist, few have table compatible UIs. You're also leaving out the fact that many commercial apps and games, such as Steam and World of Goo, for example, are for the moment x86 only, and are likely to remain that way unless there is enough adoption of Ubuntu Tablet to justify a port (assuming it requires more than just a recompile, which is likely). My prediction is without Android compatibility, no tablet manufacturer will adopt Ubuntu, and without significant adoption, no developers of existing Linux apps will bother writing new UIs for Ubuntu Tablet. You absolutely need to start off a new mobile OS with a rich selection of appropriate (eg. Tablet UI) apps or you're dead in the water.
Well. Maybe it's a bit silly to go so far as air, but how about this: obviously any media or art we consume, whether book, painting, tv, music, or video game, affects us in some way. Billions have been killed as a result of direct commands originating in violent books (ones we revere out of tradition and political correctness), yet nobody would dare ban them. We don't, because we realize that while a book can command a person to kill somebody, it cannot load the gun and pull the trigger. Yet the very same people who revere those violent books will have us believe that video games can do exactly that. It's throwing personal responsibility out the window. That's even avoiding the fact that religious books contain direct commands to commit violence and video games are very explicitly works of fiction.
They quote the Sun, as a source the Lanza played video games? Supposedly going off the word of a plumber who supposedly heard this from his mother? Why am I not surprised no other major news outlet has claimed this despite the fact the Sun published it's claims in mid December. Even if it were true, I'm willing to bed a significant portion of the younger generation has played CoD at one time or another. I have. I'm willing to bet they breathed air at some point or another. Are we to ban that?
Without this, I can't see much adoption. Who wants to buy a tablet if it has no apps? Linux has plenty, sure, but are they optimized for a tablet interface? Given that it's already a linux kernel, wouldn't it be possible to add the dalvik VM and run android apps? So far as I undrestand, this was the case with the previous Nexus 7 iteration of Ubuntu. Why was this changed? If they release this for Nexus 7, i'll probably run it off a USB stick if possible, but I won't flash it over android unless there is some compatibility there. Simply put, I've purchased Android apps, and I don't want to lose those.
Depends on the state, and whether the matter is covered by anti-SLAPP legislation. California is quite good, for example. I was sued there and my lawyers took the case on a partial contingent fee basis. Didn't cost me a penny in the end. Cost the other guy over half a million. It's not all bad, and even the worst state is better than anywhere else in the world, and I've lived in quite a few places.
it's more nuanced than that. Accidental is probably not what you're thinking of. What I think you're trying to refer to is called Actual Malice and this comes into play only when discussing public figures (or limited purpose public figures) on a matter of public interest. Otherwise, the plaintiff does not need to prove reckless disregard for the truth (which has it's own tests).
This is Canada. Such a suit would likely never have been filed in the states. although anti-SLAPP does vary from state to state, US defamation law is generally far more defendant friendly. The onus is reversed and there has never been something like NYT v. Sullivan in Canada so far as I know.
Was I court ordered into AA? No. Did I ever go voluntarily? No. Does any of this matter? No. I don't like AA for the same reason I don't like Scientology, Islam, or most any other religion. I consider it dangerous bullshit. I don't need to be a member of an organisation to study it. I'd think being an impartial observer would make me more, and not less, qualified to comment. I have known members, have talked to members, have read the dogma, and have come to my own conclusions, just as I have with any number of other religions, cults, and cult-like groups.
"Attraction, not promotion" is a nice slogan, but like the distinction between "spiritual" and "religious", it merely serves to obfuscate. Are you trying to tell me that if an AA member meets a drunk, he's not going to invite him or her to a meeting? The 12th step states "Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.". That sounds a lot like prosthelytizing to me, whether you want to call it that or not. Does AA claim to be the only way? It does and it doesn't. Like most religions, contradictions abound.
The big book states on page 44 (all references 3rd edition) "suffering from an illness which only a spiritual experience will conquer... At first some of us tried to avoid the issue, hoping against hope we were not true alcoholics. But after a while we had to face the fact that we must find a spiritual basis of life — or else". Page 257 states "he was insisting that he had found the only cure". Page 259 states "they had found the only remedy". the 12&12 states "Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant. His drunkenness and dissolution are not penalties inflicted by people in authority; they result from his personal disobedience to spiritual principles." This is nothing to say for the slogans such as "our way or the die way" or "work the steps or die". It's very, very, clear that despite your claims, both mainstream AA literature and the majority of practitioners hold AA to indeed be the only way, and they're not shy about shoving it down newcomer's throats. You're either dissembling, or misinformed.
You're right that many atheists "choose" AA. Many do not know how stooped in dogma the program is until they're thoroughly involved. Many others, as you point out, do not have a choice. You claim that AA has nothing to do with this. Why then, does AA instruct it's members to lobby the courts (official AA publication), you can see how the "attraction" dogma is rationalized away? AA recieves a significant portion of it's membership from programs and court orders. This has been the case since AA's beginnings. Again. You either dissemble, or you are misinformed.
I don't deny there are some people who stay sober using AA, nor do I deny that there are those who stay sober by dressing up in a tu tu and dancing the macerena on one leg. It doesn't mean either solution is effective compared to a control group, which has been done and is very much possible despite your insistence. It also has been done and AA has never been shown to be effective. Some studies (Brandsma, et al) would seem to actually suggest it increases binge drinking behavior, which is not surprising considering the "one drink, one drunk" dogma drilled into member's heads. While you're right that AA itself may never take a standpoint on such a public matter as this vaccine or antabuse, you can guarantee that those who find AA to be the one and only cure to a "spritual" disease will try their best to "help" those suffering from Alcholism to find the "right" solutions.
It prevents people from seeking or discovering or creating actual solutions if they already believe God gave the perfect solution to some philandering scam artist in the thirties. It's religion, it spreads like a disease, and by preventing actual progress, it actually kills people like one. That is why I hate it. Yes. Hate. I hate what destroys society and drags us all down into ignorance. Is that not reason enough?
It has not been proven to work. It has been proven to be no better than doing nothing at all (spontanious rate of remission). Penn and Teller even did an episode on it (search YouTube). Pretty damning stuff. AA is popular because it is free, because people are court ordered into it, and because prosthelitizing is part of the program, not because of any inherent quality.
If they were truly your friends, you would steer them towards alternatives that work. AA's success rate is no better than the rate of spontanious remission and there is evidence to suggest (brandsma, et al) that it actually increases behaviors such as binge drinking significantly. Hell. Even Scientology's program has a better success rate, though I in no way endorse that. If your friend is sick, choose science, not feel-good bullshit that spreads like a disease on our society.
You must still be suffering? It's useless talking to you zombie fucks. Anybody who dares criticize the great organization is automatically a drunk. The 12 step program was judged a religion by the SCOTUS precisely because they found the distinction between "religion" and "spiritual" to be an obfuscation. You can believe whatever you want, and if you think you're not a member, being close to a member is close enough to soak up the BS as you so evidently show (if you're even telling the truth). Hell. In this day and age, watching TV / pop culture, stooped in dogma, is enough.
Slashdot Mirror
Not necessarily true. It depends. Search on this page for "punitive damages".
They didn't have a valid point. The car did not run out of power. The show portrayed the car begin pushed, as i if it actually had. That may not have been an explicit lie (i mean, you can push a car that's full of gas, too), but it sure as shit is a misleading, asshole move. The car, fully charged, will get you over 300 miles, as I understand it, though less so at very high speeds. It can fast charge in an hour or so to 80%, which isn't so bad, even long distance. In a pinch you can charge it off a regular power outlet, though that takes a lot longer. The point being that unless you're trying very hard and ignoring the car's very clear warnings, it will not leave you stranded any more than a gas car will.
Posting to undo bad mod.
That depends. Some lawyers are willing to take defense cases on a contingent fee basis. I was sued once for defamation. Because the case was filed in a state where there were strong anti-SLAPP laws, my, normally 500/hr lawyers took the case for (mostly) free with a relatively small retainer. They were so confident the case was bs, had no chance of winning, and that they could get paid through the anti-SLAPP statute, they were willing to take the small risk of losing. The case ended up costing the plaintiff probably close to half a million by the time the dust settled (the judge even granted them a 1.5x multiplier for their risk). The point is there are lawyers out there who are willing to take these sorts of cases if there are statutes out there that will allow them to get paid. I think this sounds like a good law, even for the small guys.
One solid defense is that there is no case unless they disclose it to a third party, which they will not. If you did, then you would consent to the publication.
No sense of humor? Try this one: http://www.2abd.com/social-studies/groupthink/im-a-racist-sexist-homophobe-and-also-i-hate-the-children-and-the-eldery/
So far as I know the newer intel integrated gpus all have hardware h264 encoding and decoding built in so full motion video shouldn't be a problem. Benchmarks also indicate the 3d performance isn't horrible, although still not what you'd get from a dedicated solution. For a notebook where battery life is more important than performance, it's a good choice.
Will the publisher of WoG release a Unity optimized arm *Linux* version to satisfy all of the 10 people who will use Ubuntu Tablet? To get those users there first, you need apps. So you need Android compatibility.
Google hasn't interfered with the Play Store running on things like Cyanogen Mod, as long as it's not bundled. Why would they do it here? Besides: Amazon has an android app store. What's preventing them from selling apps directly to Ubuntu users? It would benefit both Ubuntu and Amazon by having such a compatibility layer. It would be even nicer if Google could partner with Canonical so searching for an app through the lenses would yield results for both stores. Users could choose the cheaper price.
I suspect it's more to do with not wanting to rape the tablet's flash memory with a swap partition, and wanting users to be able to run more than a few apps at a time. I wouldn't worry too much about it, though. I'm sure in time there will be custom Ubuntu roms built for all sorts of other devices. Personally, i'm hoping for Nexus 7, which has 1GB of ram.
None of those solutions, so far as has been said, will be set up or bundled with Ubuntu Desktop. I get there is almost always a way to do something in Linux, but that won't matter if it isn't already set up when a person buys a tablet. They want to click on the Google Play store (or perhaps search these through a lens, which I find very cool) and download apps. If there is going to be any significant adoption of Ubuntu desktop, this needs to be bundled in, even if means paying the "Google Tax". Even Amazon's android app store would work. At the absolute minimum, it needs to be able to run .apks out of the box so a person can install a market and those apps need to be treated as equal citizens. Otherwise it'll be a niche rom that nobody outside of a very small technical circle will ever flash and will likely stagnate and die, which I would hate to see as from the video, the interface looks like a nice mix of some of the best tablet UIs so far, with some very creative additions.
You miss my point, which is that while plenty of linux apps already exist, few have table compatible UIs. You're also leaving out the fact that many commercial apps and games, such as Steam and World of Goo, for example, are for the moment x86 only, and are likely to remain that way unless there is enough adoption of Ubuntu Tablet to justify a port (assuming it requires more than just a recompile, which is likely). My prediction is without Android compatibility, no tablet manufacturer will adopt Ubuntu, and without significant adoption, no developers of existing Linux apps will bother writing new UIs for Ubuntu Tablet. You absolutely need to start off a new mobile OS with a rich selection of appropriate (eg. Tablet UI) apps or you're dead in the water.
Well. Maybe it's a bit silly to go so far as air, but how about this: obviously any media or art we consume, whether book, painting, tv, music, or video game, affects us in some way. Billions have been killed as a result of direct commands originating in violent books (ones we revere out of tradition and political correctness), yet nobody would dare ban them. We don't, because we realize that while a book can command a person to kill somebody, it cannot load the gun and pull the trigger. Yet the very same people who revere those violent books will have us believe that video games can do exactly that. It's throwing personal responsibility out the window. That's even avoiding the fact that religious books contain direct commands to commit violence and video games are very explicitly works of fiction.
They quote the Sun, as a source the Lanza played video games? Supposedly going off the word of a plumber who supposedly heard this from his mother? Why am I not surprised no other major news outlet has claimed this despite the fact the Sun published it's claims in mid December. Even if it were true, I'm willing to bed a significant portion of the younger generation has played CoD at one time or another. I have. I'm willing to bet they breathed air at some point or another. Are we to ban that?
Without this, I can't see much adoption. Who wants to buy a tablet if it has no apps? Linux has plenty, sure, but are they optimized for a tablet interface? Given that it's already a linux kernel, wouldn't it be possible to add the dalvik VM and run android apps? So far as I undrestand, this was the case with the previous Nexus 7 iteration of Ubuntu. Why was this changed? If they release this for Nexus 7, i'll probably run it off a USB stick if possible, but I won't flash it over android unless there is some compatibility there. Simply put, I've purchased Android apps, and I don't want to lose those.
Depends on the state, and whether the matter is covered by anti-SLAPP legislation. California is quite good, for example. I was sued there and my lawyers took the case on a partial contingent fee basis. Didn't cost me a penny in the end. Cost the other guy over half a million. It's not all bad, and even the worst state is better than anywhere else in the world, and I've lived in quite a few places.
it's more nuanced than that. Accidental is probably not what you're thinking of. What I think you're trying to refer to is called Actual Malice and this comes into play only when discussing public figures (or limited purpose public figures) on a matter of public interest. Otherwise, the plaintiff does not need to prove reckless disregard for the truth (which has it's own tests).
This is Canada. Such a suit would likely never have been filed in the states. although anti-SLAPP does vary from state to state, US defamation law is generally far more defendant friendly. The onus is reversed and there has never been something like NYT v. Sullivan in Canada so far as I know.
Was I court ordered into AA? No. Did I ever go voluntarily? No. Does any of this matter? No. I don't like AA for the same reason I don't like Scientology, Islam, or most any other religion. I consider it dangerous bullshit. I don't need to be a member of an organisation to study it. I'd think being an impartial observer would make me more, and not less, qualified to comment. I have known members, have talked to members, have read the dogma, and have come to my own conclusions, just as I have with any number of other religions, cults, and cult-like groups.
... At first some of us tried to avoid the issue, hoping against hope we were not true alcoholics. But after a while we had to face the fact that we must find a spiritual basis of life — or else". Page 257 states "he was insisting that he had found the only cure". Page 259 states "they had found the only remedy". the 12&12 states "Unless each A.A. member follows to the best of his ability our suggested Twelve Steps to recovery, he almost certainly signs his own death warrant. His drunkenness and dissolution are not penalties inflicted by people in authority; they result from his personal disobedience to spiritual principles." This is nothing to say for the slogans such as "our way or the die way" or "work the steps or die". It's very, very, clear that despite your claims, both mainstream AA literature and the majority of practitioners hold AA to indeed be the only way, and they're not shy about shoving it down newcomer's throats. You're either dissembling, or misinformed.
"Attraction, not promotion" is a nice slogan, but like the distinction between "spiritual" and "religious", it merely serves to obfuscate. Are you trying to tell me that if an AA member meets a drunk, he's not going to invite him or her to a meeting? The 12th step states "Having had a spiritual awakening as the result of these steps, we tried to carry this message to alcoholics, and to practice these principles in all our affairs.". That sounds a lot like prosthelytizing to me, whether you want to call it that or not. Does AA claim to be the only way? It does and it doesn't. Like most religions, contradictions abound.
The big book states on page 44 (all references 3rd edition) "suffering from an illness which only a spiritual experience will conquer
You're right that many atheists "choose" AA. Many do not know how stooped in dogma the program is until they're thoroughly involved. Many others, as you point out, do not have a choice. You claim that AA has nothing to do with this. Why then, does AA instruct it's members to lobby the courts (official AA publication), you can see how the "attraction" dogma is rationalized away? AA recieves a significant portion of it's membership from programs and court orders. This has been the case since AA's beginnings. Again. You either dissemble, or you are misinformed.
I don't deny there are some people who stay sober using AA, nor do I deny that there are those who stay sober by dressing up in a tu tu and dancing the macerena on one leg. It doesn't mean either solution is effective compared to a control group, which has been done and is very much possible despite your insistence. It also has been done and AA has never been shown to be effective. Some studies (Brandsma, et al) would seem to actually suggest it increases binge drinking behavior, which is not surprising considering the "one drink, one drunk" dogma drilled into member's heads. While you're right that AA itself may never take a standpoint on such a public matter as this vaccine or antabuse, you can guarantee that those who find AA to be the one and only cure to a "spritual" disease will try their best to "help" those suffering from Alcholism to find the "right" solutions.
It prevents people from seeking or discovering or creating actual solutions if they already believe God gave the perfect solution to some philandering scam artist in the thirties. It's religion, it spreads like a disease, and by preventing actual progress, it actually kills people like one. That is why I hate it. Yes. Hate. I hate what destroys society and drags us all down into ignorance. Is that not reason enough?
It has not been proven to work. It has been proven to be no better than doing nothing at all (spontanious rate of remission). Penn and Teller even did an episode on it (search YouTube). Pretty damning stuff. AA is popular because it is free, because people are court ordered into it, and because prosthelitizing is part of the program, not because of any inherent quality.
Sadly, you're absolutely right.
If they were truly your friends, you would steer them towards alternatives that work. AA's success rate is no better than the rate of spontanious remission and there is evidence to suggest (brandsma, et al) that it actually increases behaviors such as binge drinking significantly. Hell. Even Scientology's program has a better success rate, though I in no way endorse that. If your friend is sick, choose science, not feel-good bullshit that spreads like a disease on our society.
No, though some are more fucked up than others.
You must still be suffering? It's useless talking to you zombie fucks. Anybody who dares criticize the great organization is automatically a drunk. The 12 step program was judged a religion by the SCOTUS precisely because they found the distinction between "religion" and "spiritual" to be an obfuscation. You can believe whatever you want, and if you think you're not a member, being close to a member is close enough to soak up the BS as you so evidently show (if you're even telling the truth). Hell. In this day and age, watching TV / pop culture, stooped in dogma, is enough.