Well, if you think doing something for the sake of doing something is a sign of a functioning government, you might be right. However, I would disagree with you. I will vote for them because they have the honesty to say spending to much in a time we are already spending too much is just wrong no matter what social stigma you attach to it.
Why this boggles your mind, I will never understand.
If you say A leads to B leads to C the idea you are trying to get across is that A leads to C. If the idea you are trying to get across is simply that A leads to B you don't mention C at all, because it is a distraction from your actual point.
It's not my link. It's Beck's link.
If you say A leads to B leads to C the idea you are trying to get across is that A leads to C. If the idea you are trying to get across is simply that A leads to B you don't mention C at all, because it is a distraction from your actual point.
No, it is you. You are insisting a fallacy is logic. You are the one insisting widespread genocide which the T4 program in and of itself fits the definition of even if you limit it to the forced sterilizations, has to be the holocaust instead. And in the process, you are ignoring that the comment was about one person's practices in order to somehow exaggerate the absurdity you injected.
But if he'd done that he wouldn't have you providing rationalizations for him. This way he gets exactly enough deniability that you;re carrying his water.
You mean if he had said what you want his comment to say, I wouldn't be telling you he didn't say what you think he said? Of course that is just silly, I mean the part where you somehow think if he would have came out and said what you wanted him to say somehow validates your premise.
He's basically trolling. He wants to make everyone think he's accusing Obama of the Holocaust, but not get dinged by Godwin's Law.
Here is a hint. Godwin's law is a copout for people who cannot defend their positions. No one in an intelligent discussion follows it. It was originally meant for forum trolls who make strawman arguments. Not to sequester intelligent debate. People with a brain do not get dinged by Godwin's law. You do not lose and argument by subjecting historical information into it.
As for forced sterilization of the handicapped being genocide, you are mistaken. The key phrase is "of the handicapped." Since handicapped can be of any ethnicity, race, or national group a program against them cannot be intended to eliminate a race, ethnicity, or national group from a region in general. In specific T4 was targeted at ethnic Germans, and the Nazis had no plan to eliminate ethnic Germans from any area.
Not according to Henry Friedlander. Of course under his premise, your objection to Beck's terminology is moot as he lays the foundation the the holocaust was more or less an extension of the T4 program. So perhaps you are right except that would mean widespread support for the validity of your interpretation of Beck's claim. Or in other words, Beck would have been reciting common understandings of the development of the holocaust which is argued as an extension of the T4 program. The holocaust certainly was a product of the nazi eugenics program.
The other problem with the argument is it's based on a false premise. Planned Parenthood clinics are not concentrated in minority areas. Studies arguing the opposite are all done by pre-life groups who aren't really interested in finding out the truth. They're interested in getting a talking point they can use to pry the black vote from Progressive Democrats.
Pay attention to the details. Abortion clinics does not equal clinics. Your argument is the false premise.
Their problem is black people have sources of information beyond the black church. For example, their mothers, who are well aware that when the pro-life movement's current white, southern, conservative leaders were loudly proclaiming Segregation was God's Will (and we have studies to prove it's natural and necessary) Planned Parenthood was in the coalition that beat them.
Yeah, those southern democrats were something else weren't they. However, that ha
Well, I find it funny that Bill Clinton is known for a thriving economy, what was different between then and now, the same things that were different when Reagan and Bush 1 was president. The president had a congress that wouldn't bend at every whim and support what they wanted to do. Instead, congress had to convince the president it was a good idea and the president had to convince the congress. The most profitable times our economy has seen in the last 45 years has been when the government was actually checking and balancing each other. This is when one party controls congress and another controls the executive. When this happens, we end the extremes and get things that work.
did you really just compare God to a bunch of man-made constructs in order to prove his existence?
I sure did. At least under the threat of punishment. Did you somehow think I was some holey roller who wouldn't point out the obvious flaws in your argument or something?
is that supposed to be sarcastic, or just an indication that you've completely lost the plot?
lol.. It's demonstrating your ignorance is what it is doing. People reject the teachings of religion all the time. Even after knowing about heaven and hell. Almost every self proclaimed Atheist in the internet claims they grew up in this church going catholic school fire and brimstone childhood and somehow became enlightened. If the belief in god was coercion, are you going to tell me that they are somehow forced to still belief in it? The answer to that from anyone who isn't brainwashed is obviously no. If they do not believe in God or the supposed punishment, they are not being coerced.
Well, firstly language does not require belief, either you learn it and it's useful for you, or you don't and it's not. Math, also, doesn't require belief. It's a completely man-made logical construct. If you don't believe "1+1=2" then you're ignorant. if you believe "1+1 2", then you're confused. As for science, you can deny evolution and the age of the universe. go ahead...
lol.. Way to miss the entire point. What does not doing well in school or finishing school do? It damns you to a life of laborous work, a life that you can't make money in, a life where you are more likely to get killed trying to get money or do something illegal in the same and end up in jail. How is that any different then someone saying believe in God or go to the hell this God commands. Even if your premise of coercion is remotely true, it is no different then coercion we experience anywhere else in life.
It may be true that teaching them is similar. However, coercing them to believe it under threat of eternal damnation takes a special kind of psychopath.
Nope, it's the same damn thing except that the realities of making someone's life a hell actually exists in the real world where people experience it daily because employers automatically reject otherwise qualified candidates for not having a high school diploma or equivalent. Certain types of loans and grants to better a person's life isn't available to people without a diploma. In short, the real life damnation is much more real and has an actual impact on people where the eternal damnation will only impact the people who believe there is a God who had a message. Well, that unless it turns out to be true, but we will likely never know until we are not alive if it's possible.
I'm fine with people ignoring a story because they do not have time to research it and move. This is true no matter what the source is. The problem I seem to have is when they do have the time to research it as demonstrated by their posting of how they aren't going to accept it no matter what because they do not like the source. If you reject the source and are somehow assed enough to comment on it, you certainly have the less then 5 minutes to verify the contents of the story.
If you would have said nothing and moved on, there would be no argument either. In fact, if you spent a fraction of the energy you have so far on refuting the claims, you would have found that even though you don't like the source, the claims were true or at least being picked up by legit sources. If you find none of the other sites with the story is legit, then that mental defect is with you- not Glenn Beck.
The fact is that academic administrators have all but colluded with corporate-owned bookstores.
And they work school policy to enforce they position too. A lot of schools will hold Grant and loan payment disbursements until after class starts forcing you to buy from the campus store on credit instead of having the options to get the books for 1/10th the price on the internet.
lol.. You should stick to the politics in your country unless you are willing to pay attention to what happens in this country. In fact, you probably should learn how to pay attention to what was written in front of you.
Both parties do the same things. The extremes pushed by either is not good. Obamacare got passed by using legislative tricks to snake it past the opposition and it is riddled with faults a mile long.
Your rant about the parties being the same as a cop out is completely incorrect too. My entire point was that one party contrasting the other was the best scenario because it avoids the extremes of either. For you to say that's a cop out is a clear sign that you had no intention for a discussion but rather wanted to cheer lead for what you think is best or rail at what you do not like. There is a problem though, you don't know what you are talking about. Now go troll somewhere else. And it might help if you actually read what is posted and at least try to comprehend it before injecting such nonsense and rubbish again. I mean for you remind me of the idiot who always raises his hand at the end of a training seminar and asks a question that was answered 6 times during the training and is an obvious conclusion to what was just covered before closing for questions. If you going to be in the room, pay attention to what is happening.
It's all pretty easy to do on about any system. But doing so is not zero IT and it is not getting away with not paying someone $35k a year to admin it either. Even if your official job title is director of sales and you are building it yourself or checking the logs and so on, you are IT in the process.
An interesting test might be to determine how much time is spent doing the administration stuff on the side for the employees who have to deal with it, then comparing it to the potential productivity lost by not doing their normal jobs. If it's half of the 35K a year as suggested earlier, perhaps it might be more beneficial hiring the intern to do the administration tasks and find a way to have them increase productivity of others in the off hours where it isn't needed.
Well, you don't seem to know what you are talking about and obviously have not paid much attention to American politics in the last 30 years. The problem is that both parties given the change will do the same to the extreme. The press has no problem criticizing republicans or even democrats. They have given President Obama a big pass on a lot of issues they had grilled Bush over though.
The congress simply needs to be controlled by one party with the administration being controlled by another. What we end up with is the extreme policies being negated and the meaningful ones that work getting center stage. And yes, I'm a firm believer that the government does not need to be constantly passing laws or doing something. I think it is much more effective and efficient if they do less things right then doing something to justify whatever need they have. There should be a 1 year knee jerk wait on everything suggested unless 3/4 of both the house and senate agree something needs done right now. We have too many bad laws because somebody should do something and think of the children. We have too many bad laws because the democrats controlled everything and because the republicans controlled everything. I say can the bullshit, make them meet in the middle and only pass meaningful and effective laws within the limits of the constitution. In order for the checks and balances to be effective, there needs to be bickering between the president and congress. This is how we know they aren't letting each other run wild.
If you are not syncing to a NTP source somewhere, which there should have been plenty to from in a windows server environment that is set and forget with bunches of SBS servers (lol), hardware lockups can cause the Linux system to lose time. It can also cause the CMOS time to lose time depending on what kind of main board was present.
It sounds to me that the samba was installed on some old hardware that was giving windows a hard time running reliably and someone re-purposed it for a Samba server. They then probably attempted to make a buck and sold it to them or he's full of crap and projecting his experience running his mom's network from the basement. Either way, it's not important as it sounds a lot like faulty hardware was the problem.
I think what he is saying is that the SBS needs periodic administration too. In fact, I know it does. It needs updates, it needs logs read, it needs disk and storage space monitored. backups, It needs services monitored. it needs users added and removed, it needs passwords changed, That is of course if you are doing anything with it that it was designed to do instead of putting it on a network with no internet access and using it as an overgrown NAS.
I have samba boxes up and running for more then 10 years with as little as changing a few drives in the raid out as needed when it was put in a no internet access NAS type role. Of course I didn't jump to the newest flashy distro to build the boxes either. I used stable distros and stable versions of Samba and all the services and ports except what was needed for Samba and SSH-ing into it was shut down.
But whatever OS you have, windows, linux, BSD, some Apple perversion, if you are doing more then simple file sharing, you need to administrate the system in ways not connected to things fucking up. If you do not, you are asking for problems that will lock your business down for days. I know, I've had to go in and clean them up and get companies back up and running- when it is possible.
Of course he doesn't. He's running SBS in multiple instances as a file server. Small Business Server does not play well and was not designed to be grouped like that. Adding a Samba or just another windows server to the mix can and will cause problems on the other servers.
No, the subject was ignoring the content because someone thought the source was unreliable. If the person who objected to the source would have spent less then 5 minutes looking for other sources, he would have realized the information was legit no matter what he thought about the source.
But instead, he insisted on living a fallacy and discounted the information because he didn't like one of the available sources even though the information was true.
The real idiot is the person who will ignore true and correct information only because they do not like the source they originally heard from.
The Gingrich congress got us a balanced budget, low energy costs, and a thriving economy. You know, the stuff that Clinton claims made him a good president. Of course the low energy costs was probably the most effective on the economy part which allows the budget to be balanced. But the real key was limiting the extremes of both ends and allowing most of what was only productive to be passed into law.
You are saying he said A (Empathy) leads to B (T4, the euthanasia program), leads to C (genocide everywhere, the Holocaust). Which means that simple logic says you agreed Beck's position was that Empathy leads to the Holocaust.
Your logic is broken. B-C does not equal A-C. No matter how much you ignore logic and try to impose this fallacy, you simply are wrong unless B and C is the same which requires the genocide everywhere to be the acts directly to the T4 program. Either your assertion of the holocaust is wrong or your linking of empathy to it as in the statement is wrong. And yes, it is your twisting, not his wording.
As for whether Beck is bringing up the Holocaust, if he wasn't he wouldn't have called it "genocide everywhere." Murdering the handicapped is not genocide. Genocide is a crime, with a strict legal definition, and killing the handicapped simply doesn't count. For another T4 did not apply "everywhere." The Nazis never got around to killing the handicapped in occupied Croatia or Hungary, but they did get the Jews.
The inverse is true too, if Beck meant the holocaust, he would have simply stated the holocaust. The Holocaust is a well known and defined period with specific definitions. Although after looking up the definition of genocide and the Nazi implementation of T4, I have concluded that the forced sterilization of people as well as mass killing of them count as genocide. But to your point on the Nazis not getting around to killing the handicapped in certain areas so it doesn't count is simply ridiculous. The Nazis didn't get around to killing off every jew under their control either, that doesn't mean the holocaust didn't happen. You are reaching for straws to prop your argument and they are more and more fragile each time.
As for Sanger, your use of her name indicates that you are the one reading too many ideological websites. She was opposed to killing the handicapped in general, and T4 in specific.
No, I brought Sanger up simply because she is a modern name known for her support and practice of Eugenics. You are correct though, she only advocated the sterilization and prevention of the lesser people so they wouldn't contaminate the gene pool of the good people. She thought the lesser and genetically inferior people had a right to live, just not reproduce or spread their defective genes. That is why she got into Birth control and giving it to the poor and undesirables. Some say this is why to this day that no Planned Parenthood abortion clinic has ever been set up in an area without a significant minority population. I think it is the economics of scale, any location large enough to be served efficiently by a clinic that kills off the reproduction of people would by default have a large minority population.
Eugenics was actually less controversial in the 30s then institutionalized racism, yet the sites that argue all Sanger's ideas are BS because she supported Eugenics never mention that Rockefeller of the famous Rockefeller Republicans put millions into the international Eugenics movement,
I do not think that you can lump the crowning scientific achievement of atheism meets science to any specific political group. (and yes, that is what it was- Darwinism principle of survival of the fittest taken to a utility because people were not created by God). States all across the US adopted forced sterilization laws which is why I specifically mentioned California's too. It is also interesting that under the current definition of genocide, this forced sterilization can be considered genocide- even though it was still in practice in some states as late as the 1980's.
that Southern Conservative states like NC had the most "comprehensive" sterilization programs, that California of the day was classic Western populist a la Wyoming, etc.
And he said altruism "was the beginning" of euthanasia (which led to the Holocaust).
Take a deep breath before replying. Read then reread what we have posted and what Glenn Beck has said. Take another deep breath, then think a little before replying. Beck did not say altruism was the beginning of euthanasia, he said in one specific instance, empathy was.
When I summarized it as altruism leads to euthanasia (which led to the Holocaust) you didn't disagree. You didn't claim I was manipulating his argument. You didn't do that until I proved that if "altruism leads to euthanasia leads to genocide" he's saying "altruism leads to genocide."
First, I can't find where you said ultruism or even empathy only leads to euthanasia. Of course if you did, I wouldn't disagree with it because that is exactly what Beck said, Hitler's empathy lead to euthanasia or the T4 program. He didn't say he took a trip to Huston Texas and stopped in Joplin Missouri on the way which is how you read it. He said Hitler's empathy started the T4 program and that lead to genocide. Do you see the difference there? The genocide in that statement would not have happened without the euthanasia according to his statement. According to your interpretation, it would have happened regardless of euthanasia. That is not what was said nor is it what should be taken from it. This is especially true when you consider the raw facts. feeling sorry for disabled people led to killing them out of mercy. Killing people out of mercy lead to widespread genocide.
You are also insisting that this widespread genocide was the jewish holocaust but the T4 program actually killed off 70,000 people deemed unworthy of the race and killed off while another 400,000 were forced sterilized. That in and of itself would be considered a genocide which means we do not even need to get to the holocaust and we know for a fact this happened. Eugenics was the leading scientific theory at the turn of the century and Hitler shared a lot in common with Margarette Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood who attempted to sterilize all the crazies in the US. It was actually law in the US in many states to report birth defects and sterilize mothers. There is even a claim that Hitler's T4 program was modeled after California's 1933 eugenics law.
If the thrust of his argument was "Obama is wrong because Obama wants to kill the handicapped," he wouldn't mention the Holocaust. He's discussing the role of empathy in the Judiciary. Killing millions of Jews, a million-odd Communist POWs, hundreds of thousands of Gypsies, etc. just isn't relevant unless his entire argument rests on the basis that it IS relevant.
I don't know he did say anything about the holocaust or killing of any jew. You are the one injecting that and I can find no creditable evidence that he mentioned anything about the holocaust. I can find evidence that would consider the T4 program a practice of genocide in and of itself though. This is without ever needing to get to the holocaust. Is it that much of a surprise that a government who killed people because they were jews actually killed a lot of other people they found not worthy before singling out the jews?
In other words he's either very clumsily trying to equate the Holocaust with sympathy for various sides in Judicial disputes, or he's got Tourette's.
Actually, I think it is you who is trying to equate the two out of ignorance over what was being discussed. The more I look into it, what was said, the more I find your conclusions completely wrong. Perhaps you should spend some time investigating it. Perhaps you were lied to by some people who share similar beliefs because they know it would evoke your emotions and create empathy to the jews and you would hate and reject what Beck has said instead of ignoring it or investigating it and finding some of it to be true even though it damages your w
MS is diving into the shark tank of ARM powered mobile devices specifically because their bread and butter has been threatened by the exposure of other operating systems and technology in the same tank. People have been exposed to apple and *nix like systems without getting the it's too complicated and nothing I own works complaints. They need to provide a comfortable fall back for people else they will find that apple isn't as scary as thought or that some *nix distributions just work well enough for what they want to do. As the mobile devices get more powerful and start assuming some of the capabilities of the desktop computer, they need to stay relevant or risk being replaced as an afterthought.
I think you replied to the wrong post. Well, unless we are saying the same things intentionally. However, I missed where the person I was implying was trying to be facetious for effect considering the circumstances when I initially replied.
I agree with what you say too. Especially the part about the car in a garage part. I've seen local police in my area decide to impound vehicles and do a property or inventory search to ensure the safety of personal items within a car when they can't get permission to otherwise search the vehicles. The driver is usually arrested or detained under some suspicion or pretense which gives them the ability to impound the vehicle and do this it seems.
lol.. some democrat doesn't like the truth even though it wasn't damaging to them. Yea!! Go "Troll Modding"-- it is psudoLatin for "I refuse to accept facts and disagree with reality."
Oh the joys of slashdot where down modding is a way of not dealing with facts that people do not like.
And it can be undone by simply posting to it which invited any user who's interest is piqued to hit the parent button and see what was attempted to be buried.
Actually, your lack of attention to detail has left you standing in the wrong again. It is a basic logical fallacy- not basic logic. You are incorrectly attempting to apply the principle of equivalence without checking for equivalence. A does not equal B and B does not equal C in this case.
You do not get to redefine someone's statement simply because you want them to say something you find politically advantageous to you. Beck said empathy started the T4 which led to the genocide. At best, you can say that he said euthanasia led to genocide.
But just in case you still insist he said empathy leads to the holocaust, look up pathological altruism and you will find that empathy has been a clinically define part of the motivation of genocide in historical events. Not only if your premise wrong and misleading, so is your outrage at your self induced conclusions.
I do not care who you are or who/what site is linked to. If you have an incline to finding the article not accurate or reliable, you can check with a simple google search to see if other articles will support it.
If you fail to do that and dismiss it out of hand based only on that principle, then do not bother talking about the legitimacy of the news article because you have no fucking clue about it. As it turns out, the story was legitimate and the problem is on you. You are now trying to say the story is still invalid despite being verified from at least 3 different sources because you do not agree with the original source in the story. So don't try and lecture me or anyone else about being stupid when it was just demonstrated by you. What you are doing it worse then using a bible to determine the age of the earth, what you are doing it ignoring the scientific evidence because you don't like the hair style or shirt color of the teacher who first told you about it. A much worse scenario by far.
This policy document applies to UK Government IT. Other people can do what they like. They aren't stopping you from trying to sell any format you like to anyone else, but they appear to be adding adherence to open standards as part of procurement.
If you want to to sell to the government, then make sure you comply. Or, carry on selling to anyone else you can find.
I don't think anyone said it wasn't in the UK. I know I didn't. I said it would never happen in the US though.
What is there to sue over? "Claim a taking of their product?" - that makes no sense. There are a hundred applicable policies that apply to any govenment supplier; this is just another one. A rather good one, I think, with a rationale that is hard to dispute. And nicely, it's non-discriminatory, because anyone can implement an open standard.
Yes, taking their product. There are people who are not self indulged into an ideology who think the proprietary nature of their data formats and their patents embedded with them and so on are part of their products. These same people would also think baring people from doing business with the government as they have for a long time unless they give this product to others without charge would be wrong. Now if the UK decided to create an open standard that did not infringe on the IP of some company and declare every data source has to move to it to do business, it would be a different thing. But the reality is, that is not what is being asked by this nor is it what is represented in the story. You can laugh all you want while those companies lock the implementation of this up in legal battles for the next 10 years where another government would have likely came and gone along with this concept.
And given that a company that asserts that their formats are a lock-in would cause a massive turn-off for any prospective customer, can you honestly see any company stand up and make that assertion in open court? Even MS would have difficulty swallowing that one.
I sure could see that. Except they won't present it the way you just did. They will present it as their exclusive process and data processing techniques is unique enough to give them a vastly superior product therefore a competitive advantage and giving this confidential and proprietary information to the competition would severely disadvantage the position of the products and offerings. And I can see the courts swallowing it up like a kid on chocolate pudding because it is the testament of all the IP laws developed within the country, through international law (treaty) and encouraged by previous practices by the government and the courts at large.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, if you think doing something for the sake of doing something is a sign of a functioning government, you might be right. However, I would disagree with you. I will vote for them because they have the honesty to say spending to much in a time we are already spending too much is just wrong no matter what social stigma you attach to it.
Why this boggles your mind, I will never understand.
It's not my link. It's Beck's link.
If you say A leads to B leads to C the idea you are trying to get across is that A leads to C. If the idea you are trying to get across is simply that A leads to B you don't mention C at all, because it is a distraction from your actual point.
No, it is you. You are insisting a fallacy is logic. You are the one insisting widespread genocide which the T4 program in and of itself fits the definition of even if you limit it to the forced sterilizations, has to be the holocaust instead. And in the process, you are ignoring that the comment was about one person's practices in order to somehow exaggerate the absurdity you injected.
You mean if he had said what you want his comment to say, I wouldn't be telling you he didn't say what you think he said? Of course that is just silly, I mean the part where you somehow think if he would have came out and said what you wanted him to say somehow validates your premise.
Here is a hint. Godwin's law is a copout for people who cannot defend their positions. No one in an intelligent discussion follows it. It was originally meant for forum trolls who make strawman arguments. Not to sequester intelligent debate. People with a brain do not get dinged by Godwin's law. You do not lose and argument by subjecting historical information into it.
Not according to Henry Friedlander. Of course under his premise, your objection to Beck's terminology is moot as he lays the foundation the the holocaust was more or less an extension of the T4 program. So perhaps you are right except that would mean widespread support for the validity of your interpretation of Beck's claim. Or in other words, Beck would have been reciting common understandings of the development of the holocaust which is argued as an extension of the T4 program. The holocaust certainly was a product of the nazi eugenics program.
Pay attention to the details. Abortion clinics does not equal clinics. Your argument is the false premise.
Well, I find it funny that Bill Clinton is known for a thriving economy, what was different between then and now, the same things that were different when Reagan and Bush 1 was president. The president had a congress that wouldn't bend at every whim and support what they wanted to do. Instead, congress had to convince the president it was a good idea and the president had to convince the congress. The most profitable times our economy has seen in the last 45 years has been when the government was actually checking and balancing each other. This is when one party controls congress and another controls the executive. When this happens, we end the extremes and get things that work.
I sure did. At least under the threat of punishment. Did you somehow think I was some holey roller who wouldn't point out the obvious flaws in your argument or something?
lol.. It's demonstrating your ignorance is what it is doing. People reject the teachings of religion all the time. Even after knowing about heaven and hell. Almost every self proclaimed Atheist in the internet claims they grew up in this church going catholic school fire and brimstone childhood and somehow became enlightened. If the belief in god was coercion, are you going to tell me that they are somehow forced to still belief in it? The answer to that from anyone who isn't brainwashed is obviously no. If they do not believe in God or the supposed punishment, they are not being coerced.
lol.. Way to miss the entire point. What does not doing well in school or finishing school do? It damns you to a life of laborous work, a life that you can't make money in, a life where you are more likely to get killed trying to get money or do something illegal in the same and end up in jail. How is that any different then someone saying believe in God or go to the hell this God commands. Even if your premise of coercion is remotely true, it is no different then coercion we experience anywhere else in life.
Nope, it's the same damn thing except that the realities of making someone's life a hell actually exists in the real world where people experience it daily because employers automatically reject otherwise qualified candidates for not having a high school diploma or equivalent. Certain types of loans and grants to better a person's life isn't available to people without a diploma. In short, the real life damnation is much more real and has an actual impact on people where the eternal damnation will only impact the people who believe there is a God who had a message. Well, that unless it turns out to be true, but we will likely never know until we are not alive if it's possible.
I'm fine with people ignoring a story because they do not have time to research it and move. This is true no matter what the source is. The problem I seem to have is when they do have the time to research it as demonstrated by their posting of how they aren't going to accept it no matter what because they do not like the source. If you reject the source and are somehow assed enough to comment on it, you certainly have the less then 5 minutes to verify the contents of the story.
If you would have said nothing and moved on, there would be no argument either. In fact, if you spent a fraction of the energy you have so far on refuting the claims, you would have found that even though you don't like the source, the claims were true or at least being picked up by legit sources. If you find none of the other sites with the story is legit, then that mental defect is with you- not Glenn Beck.
And they work school policy to enforce they position too. A lot of schools will hold Grant and loan payment disbursements until after class starts forcing you to buy from the campus store on credit instead of having the options to get the books for 1/10th the price on the internet.
lol.. You should stick to the politics in your country unless you are willing to pay attention to what happens in this country. In fact, you probably should learn how to pay attention to what was written in front of you.
Both parties do the same things. The extremes pushed by either is not good. Obamacare got passed by using legislative tricks to snake it past the opposition and it is riddled with faults a mile long.
Your rant about the parties being the same as a cop out is completely incorrect too. My entire point was that one party contrasting the other was the best scenario because it avoids the extremes of either. For you to say that's a cop out is a clear sign that you had no intention for a discussion but rather wanted to cheer lead for what you think is best or rail at what you do not like. There is a problem though, you don't know what you are talking about. Now go troll somewhere else. And it might help if you actually read what is posted and at least try to comprehend it before injecting such nonsense and rubbish again. I mean for you remind me of the idiot who always raises his hand at the end of a training seminar and asks a question that was answered 6 times during the training and is an obvious conclusion to what was just covered before closing for questions. If you going to be in the room, pay attention to what is happening.
It's all pretty easy to do on about any system. But doing so is not zero IT and it is not getting away with not paying someone $35k a year to admin it either. Even if your official job title is director of sales and you are building it yourself or checking the logs and so on, you are IT in the process.
An interesting test might be to determine how much time is spent doing the administration stuff on the side for the employees who have to deal with it, then comparing it to the potential productivity lost by not doing their normal jobs. If it's half of the 35K a year as suggested earlier, perhaps it might be more beneficial hiring the intern to do the administration tasks and find a way to have them increase productivity of others in the off hours where it isn't needed.
Well, you don't seem to know what you are talking about and obviously have not paid much attention to American politics in the last 30 years. The problem is that both parties given the change will do the same to the extreme. The press has no problem criticizing republicans or even democrats. They have given President Obama a big pass on a lot of issues they had grilled Bush over though.
The congress simply needs to be controlled by one party with the administration being controlled by another. What we end up with is the extreme policies being negated and the meaningful ones that work getting center stage. And yes, I'm a firm believer that the government does not need to be constantly passing laws or doing something. I think it is much more effective and efficient if they do less things right then doing something to justify whatever need they have. There should be a 1 year knee jerk wait on everything suggested unless 3/4 of both the house and senate agree something needs done right now. We have too many bad laws because somebody should do something and think of the children. We have too many bad laws because the democrats controlled everything and because the republicans controlled everything. I say can the bullshit, make them meet in the middle and only pass meaningful and effective laws within the limits of the constitution. In order for the checks and balances to be effective, there needs to be bickering between the president and congress. This is how we know they aren't letting each other run wild.
And yet, the world was so much better then. Try focusing on what was working.
If you are not syncing to a NTP source somewhere, which there should have been plenty to from in a windows server environment that is set and forget with bunches of SBS servers (lol), hardware lockups can cause the Linux system to lose time. It can also cause the CMOS time to lose time depending on what kind of main board was present.
It sounds to me that the samba was installed on some old hardware that was giving windows a hard time running reliably and someone re-purposed it for a Samba server. They then probably attempted to make a buck and sold it to them or he's full of crap and projecting his experience running his mom's network from the basement. Either way, it's not important as it sounds a lot like faulty hardware was the problem.
I think what he is saying is that the SBS needs periodic administration too. In fact, I know it does. It needs updates, it needs logs read, it needs disk and storage space monitored. backups, It needs services monitored. it needs users added and removed, it needs passwords changed, That is of course if you are doing anything with it that it was designed to do instead of putting it on a network with no internet access and using it as an overgrown NAS.
I have samba boxes up and running for more then 10 years with as little as changing a few drives in the raid out as needed when it was put in a no internet access NAS type role. Of course I didn't jump to the newest flashy distro to build the boxes either. I used stable distros and stable versions of Samba and all the services and ports except what was needed for Samba and SSH-ing into it was shut down.
But whatever OS you have, windows, linux, BSD, some Apple perversion, if you are doing more then simple file sharing, you need to administrate the system in ways not connected to things fucking up. If you do not, you are asking for problems that will lock your business down for days. I know, I've had to go in and clean them up and get companies back up and running- when it is possible.
Of course he doesn't. He's running SBS in multiple instances as a file server. Small Business Server does not play well and was not designed to be grouped like that. Adding a Samba or just another windows server to the mix can and will cause problems on the other servers.
No, the subject was ignoring the content because someone thought the source was unreliable. If the person who objected to the source would have spent less then 5 minutes looking for other sources, he would have realized the information was legit no matter what he thought about the source.
But instead, he insisted on living a fallacy and discounted the information because he didn't like one of the available sources even though the information was true.
The real idiot is the person who will ignore true and correct information only because they do not like the source they originally heard from.
The Gingrich congress got us a balanced budget, low energy costs, and a thriving economy. You know, the stuff that Clinton claims made him a good president. Of course the low energy costs was probably the most effective on the economy part which allows the budget to be balanced. But the real key was limiting the extremes of both ends and allowing most of what was only productive to be passed into law.
Your logic is broken. B-C does not equal A-C. No matter how much you ignore logic and try to impose this fallacy, you simply are wrong unless B and C is the same which requires the genocide everywhere to be the acts directly to the T4 program. Either your assertion of the holocaust is wrong or your linking of empathy to it as in the statement is wrong. And yes, it is your twisting, not his wording.
The inverse is true too, if Beck meant the holocaust, he would have simply stated the holocaust. The Holocaust is a well known and defined period with specific definitions. Although after looking up the definition of genocide and the Nazi implementation of T4, I have concluded that the forced sterilization of people as well as mass killing of them count as genocide. But to your point on the Nazis not getting around to killing the handicapped in certain areas so it doesn't count is simply ridiculous. The Nazis didn't get around to killing off every jew under their control either, that doesn't mean the holocaust didn't happen. You are reaching for straws to prop your argument and they are more and more fragile each time.
No, I brought Sanger up simply because she is a modern name known for her support and practice of Eugenics. You are correct though, she only advocated the sterilization and prevention of the lesser people so they wouldn't contaminate the gene pool of the good people. She thought the lesser and genetically inferior people had a right to live, just not reproduce or spread their defective genes. That is why she got into Birth control and giving it to the poor and undesirables. Some say this is why to this day that no Planned Parenthood abortion clinic has ever been set up in an area without a significant minority population. I think it is the economics of scale, any location large enough to be served efficiently by a clinic that kills off the reproduction of people would by default have a large minority population.
I do not think that you can lump the crowning scientific achievement of atheism meets science to any specific political group. (and yes, that is what it was- Darwinism principle of survival of the fittest taken to a utility because people were not created by God). States all across the US adopted forced sterilization laws which is why I specifically mentioned California's too. It is also interesting that under the current definition of genocide, this forced sterilization can be considered genocide- even though it was still in practice in some states as late as the 1980's.
Southern conservative states were domina
Take a deep breath before replying. Read then reread what we have posted and what Glenn Beck has said. Take another deep breath, then think a little before replying. Beck did not say altruism was the beginning of euthanasia, he said in one specific instance, empathy was.
First, I can't find where you said ultruism or even empathy only leads to euthanasia. Of course if you did, I wouldn't disagree with it because that is exactly what Beck said, Hitler's empathy lead to euthanasia or the T4 program. He didn't say he took a trip to Huston Texas and stopped in Joplin Missouri on the way which is how you read it. He said Hitler's empathy started the T4 program and that lead to genocide. Do you see the difference there? The genocide in that statement would not have happened without the euthanasia according to his statement. According to your interpretation, it would have happened regardless of euthanasia. That is not what was said nor is it what should be taken from it. This is especially true when you consider the raw facts. feeling sorry for disabled people led to killing them out of mercy. Killing people out of mercy lead to widespread genocide.
You are also insisting that this widespread genocide was the jewish holocaust but the T4 program actually killed off 70,000 people deemed unworthy of the race and killed off while another 400,000 were forced sterilized. That in and of itself would be considered a genocide which means we do not even need to get to the holocaust and we know for a fact this happened. Eugenics was the leading scientific theory at the turn of the century and Hitler shared a lot in common with Margarette Sanger, the founder of planned parenthood who attempted to sterilize all the crazies in the US. It was actually law in the US in many states to report birth defects and sterilize mothers. There is even a claim that Hitler's T4 program was modeled after California's 1933 eugenics law.
I don't know he did say anything about the holocaust or killing of any jew. You are the one injecting that and I can find no creditable evidence that he mentioned anything about the holocaust. I can find evidence that would consider the T4 program a practice of genocide in and of itself though. This is without ever needing to get to the holocaust. Is it that much of a surprise that a government who killed people because they were jews actually killed a lot of other people they found not worthy before singling out the jews?
Actually, I think it is you who is trying to equate the two out of ignorance over what was being discussed. The more I look into it, what was said, the more I find your conclusions completely wrong. Perhaps you should spend some time investigating it. Perhaps you were lied to by some people who share similar beliefs because they know it would evoke your emotions and create empathy to the jews and you would hate and reject what Beck has said instead of ignoring it or investigating it and finding some of it to be true even though it damages your w
MS is diving into the shark tank of ARM powered mobile devices specifically because their bread and butter has been threatened by the exposure of other operating systems and technology in the same tank. People have been exposed to apple and *nix like systems without getting the it's too complicated and nothing I own works complaints. They need to provide a comfortable fall back for people else they will find that apple isn't as scary as thought or that some *nix distributions just work well enough for what they want to do. As the mobile devices get more powerful and start assuming some of the capabilities of the desktop computer, they need to stay relevant or risk being replaced as an afterthought.
I think you replied to the wrong post. Well, unless we are saying the same things intentionally. However, I missed where the person I was implying was trying to be facetious for effect considering the circumstances when I initially replied.
I agree with what you say too. Especially the part about the car in a garage part. I've seen local police in my area decide to impound vehicles and do a property or inventory search to ensure the safety of personal items within a car when they can't get permission to otherwise search the vehicles. The driver is usually arrested or detained under some suspicion or pretense which gives them the ability to impound the vehicle and do this it seems.
lol.. some democrat doesn't like the truth even though it wasn't damaging to them. Yea!! Go "Troll Modding"-- it is psudoLatin for "I refuse to accept facts and disagree with reality."
Oh the joys of slashdot where down modding is a way of not dealing with facts that people do not like.
And it can be undone by simply posting to it which invited any user who's interest is piqued to hit the parent button and see what was attempted to be buried.
Actually, your lack of attention to detail has left you standing in the wrong again. It is a basic logical fallacy- not basic logic. You are incorrectly attempting to apply the principle of equivalence without checking for equivalence. A does not equal B and B does not equal C in this case.
You do not get to redefine someone's statement simply because you want them to say something you find politically advantageous to you. Beck said empathy started the T4 which led to the genocide. At best, you can say that he said euthanasia led to genocide.
But just in case you still insist he said empathy leads to the holocaust, look up pathological altruism and you will find that empathy has been a clinically define part of the motivation of genocide in historical events. Not only if your premise wrong and misleading, so is your outrage at your self induced conclusions.
I do not care who you are or who/what site is linked to. If you have an incline to finding the article not accurate or reliable, you can check with a simple google search to see if other articles will support it.
If you fail to do that and dismiss it out of hand based only on that principle, then do not bother talking about the legitimacy of the news article because you have no fucking clue about it. As it turns out, the story was legitimate and the problem is on you. You are now trying to say the story is still invalid despite being verified from at least 3 different sources because you do not agree with the original source in the story. So don't try and lecture me or anyone else about being stupid when it was just demonstrated by you. What you are doing it worse then using a bible to determine the age of the earth, what you are doing it ignoring the scientific evidence because you don't like the hair style or shirt color of the teacher who first told you about it. A much worse scenario by far.
I don't think anyone said it wasn't in the UK. I know I didn't. I said it would never happen in the US though.
Yes, taking their product. There are people who are not self indulged into an ideology who think the proprietary nature of their data formats and their patents embedded with them and so on are part of their products. These same people would also think baring people from doing business with the government as they have for a long time unless they give this product to others without charge would be wrong. Now if the UK decided to create an open standard that did not infringe on the IP of some company and declare every data source has to move to it to do business, it would be a different thing. But the reality is, that is not what is being asked by this nor is it what is represented in the story. You can laugh all you want while those companies lock the implementation of this up in legal battles for the next 10 years where another government would have likely came and gone along with this concept.
I sure could see that. Except they won't present it the way you just did. They will present it as their exclusive process and data processing techniques is unique enough to give them a vastly superior product therefore a competitive advantage and giving this confidential and proprietary information to the competition would severely disadvantage the position of the products and offerings. And I can see the courts swallowing it up like a kid on chocolate pudding because it is the testament of all the IP laws developed within the country, through international law (treaty) and encouraged by previous practices by the government and the courts at large.
Ha.. I get it now. I guess I fell asleep part way through. Good point.