Heh. I just peeked over my cube wall: my co-worker in the cube next to me has books called "Linux Kernel Development" and "Linux Device Drivers" on the shelf in his cube.
The government can simply take on more debt without raising taxes. It's not like governments aren't deep in debt already; another six-figure debt is just a drop in the bucket.
I love bitlbee+irssi; it's my main IM client (or clients, if you prefer).
Kopete isn't bad either; its integration with kdepim is phenomenal (when viewing mails in KMail, you can see the online status of the sender, if they're on a Kopete buddy list and the email address & screen name are tied together in KAddressBook).
Over here in NL, smokers -do- pay a higher premium as well.. why not? Not only are they at a higher risk of cancer (insert "my grandfather smoked 3 packs a day and lived to be 94!" anecdotal evidence here), but they're putting everybody else at that higher risk as well (or, if nothing else, afflict those with asthma and generally stink up the place). I hope you realize it's ridiculously easy to lie. They have no way of finding out.
The problem is we mistake medical care for being a fundamental necessity. Then, when idiots choose to make payments on a bigger car or TV, instead of their health insurance, we wring our hands and give a damn when the consequences of "I'd rather have more money now and accept the increased likelihood of suffering or dying later." come back and bite them. Instead, "Wow? You made a really dumb choice, didn't you. Hope the TV was worth it." becomes "Oh, that's tragic. Look how the system failed to provide you with your basic necessity. We must do something!" Frankly, both responses are idiotic.
I could be run over by a bus tomorrow, and be DOA. I'd really wish I spent that money on something I could actually enjoy while I was alive, rather than useless medical care.
Or maybe I'd get a form of cancer that even the best doctors in the world don't know how to get rid of (and there are plenty of those); I'd spend the next few years of my life in the hell that is chemotherapy and radiation, and then I'd die anyway. I'd rather die at home watching the TV I spent all my money on, not dragging out my death for years on a hospital bed in complete agony and a worse state of sickness than if I'd just let the cancer kill me.
I'd rather live a short, unhealthy life I enjoy than a long, healthy life I can't enjoy. But hey, I take responsibility for that: I don't blame the system for anything. I have health insurance, because it's only about 2% of my paycheck, but I wouldn't sweat it if I didn't have it. But I drink, I smoke, and I eat all kinds of fatty foods. If I die of simultaneous cirrhosis, lung cancer, and a heart attack, I'll be glad I had fun during the short life I had.
*sighs* - I bet he's skeptical about anthropomorphic climate change too (there seems to be an extraordinarily high overlap between the two groups). Actually, the belief in anthropogenic climate change is the religion.
Real scientists are threatened, harrassed, and intimidated into joining the cult. Don't believe me? Check this out.
I reject both creationism and anthropogenic climate change.
It is a common misconception that widescreen is any wider than 4:3. In actuality, widescreen is the same width, but the screen is _shorter_, so it has a "wider" proportion.
Thus, widescreen is really shortscreen.
Really, watch a movie made in widescreen and compare it to a 4:3 TV show. You'll notice that when there is a close-up of someone talking, the widescreen movie cuts off the top of their head , while the 4:3 TV show shows their head in full. Before anyone mentions pan-and-scan, I'll mention it's the worst of both worlds: the resolution is cut off in all four directions.
4:3 is a superior aspect ratio to widescreen; it's capable of showing more information in the same screen space. A show produced with a 4:3 camera has all the horizontal resolution of widescreen, plus extra vertical resolution. The name "widescreen" is such a misnomer; "shortscreen" is far more accurate.
I refuse to buy widescreen under any circumstances.
Guess this means I'll never buy another new laptop again.
Hmm...I wonder if I can fit the guts of a newer laptop inside my Toshiba Tecra M3's case...the mainboard on that thing is dead, so if I can use the case and screen of my M3 with the guts of a newer laptop (like the Tecra M9), that would be the only way I'd ever buy a new laptop again.
The government already _does_. It's called Eminent Domain.
Back during the Anthrax scare, the government nearly seized Bayer's patent on Cipro under Eminent Domain.
And as someone who despises both states' "rights" and intellectual "property" with a bloody passion, I'm quite torn on this. I hate anything that protects states' "rights", but I love anything that degrades copy"right".
Calling both Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams "Republicans" is horribly inaccurate.
Jefferson was a Democratic-Republican since the beginning of American party politics and until the end of his life. Adams was a Democratic-Republican early in his career, but later changed affiliations when that party broke up.
In 1824, the Democratic-Republican party shattered due to a contested nomination. Andrew Jackson's faction became the Democrats (the same Democrats as today).
John Quincy Adams' faction became the National Republicans. The National Republicans merged with a group called the Whigs in 1830 and took their name. They eventually fizzled out by 1856. They had nothing to do with the modern Republican party, which was founded in 1854 as a purely anti-slavery party (it should be noted that the Whigs never took a stance on slavery either way).
Of the two factions, Jackson's Democrats followed Jefferson's ideals and so they are considered the main successor of the Democratic-Republicans. On the other hand, Adams' National Republicans/Whigs largely adopted the ideals of the deceased Federalist Party (note that Adams' father, John Adams, was a Federalist).
Of all the Presidents you mention, Bush and Grant were the only Republicans.
Almost reminds me of the Ghost in that way. The Ghost was a communist who hated corporations; he hired himself out to other villains to do their dirty work, but gloated to himself that he loves it so much he'd do it for free.
He was Stark's ideological opposite, and a perfect foil: Stark belives that corporate power can be used to effect positive change in the world; the Ghost believes that corporate power _is_ what's wrong with the world.
Too bad the writers went the Mary Sue route and had him kill Spymaster for no other reason then to look like a badass.
Slashdot Mirror
Heh. I just peeked over my cube wall: my co-worker in the cube next to me has books called "Linux Kernel Development" and "Linux Device Drivers" on the shelf in his cube.
Close. It was for Solaris (which is a SysV derivative), not Java.
One line of code:
}
The government should never charge for any service via any methods other than taxation and voluntary donation.
If the government cannot afford to provide a service without sending a bill, they should not offer the service at all.
Only private organizations should be allowed to bill people.
Except that the taxpayers are already paying.
The government can simply take on more debt without raising taxes. It's not like governments aren't deep in debt already; another six-figure debt is just a drop in the bucket.
What the fuck?
If she didn't call for the search party herself, she should not be billed. If I were her, I'd just refuse to pay.
I love bitlbee+irssi; it's my main IM client (or clients, if you prefer).
Kopete isn't bad either; its integration with kdepim is phenomenal (when viewing mails in KMail, you can see the online status of the sender, if they're on a Kopete buddy list and the email address & screen name are tied together in KAddressBook).
Agreed wholeheartedly. KDE 4 is a massive disappointment.
Oh, and you forgot the new Windows-tastic K menu. Blech.
Signed: Bitter KDE 3.5 user.
Thank goodness they're using KDE 3.5, not the piece of merda that is KDE 4.
Yes, I'm bitter.
I could be run over by a bus tomorrow, and be DOA. I'd really wish I spent that money on something I could actually enjoy while I was alive, rather than useless medical care.
Or maybe I'd get a form of cancer that even the best doctors in the world don't know how to get rid of (and there are plenty of those); I'd spend the next few years of my life in the hell that is chemotherapy and radiation, and then I'd die anyway. I'd rather die at home watching the TV I spent all my money on, not dragging out my death for years on a hospital bed in complete agony and a worse state of sickness than if I'd just let the cancer kill me.
I'd rather live a short, unhealthy life I enjoy than a long, healthy life I can't enjoy. But hey, I take responsibility for that: I don't blame the system for anything. I have health insurance, because it's only about 2% of my paycheck, but I wouldn't sweat it if I didn't have it. But I drink, I smoke, and I eat all kinds of fatty foods. If I die of simultaneous cirrhosis, lung cancer, and a heart attack, I'll be glad I had fun during the short life I had.
Dear Zod I wish I had mod points...
Real scientists are threatened, harrassed, and intimidated into joining the cult. Don't believe me? Check this out.
I reject both creationism and anthropogenic climate change.
Humans are the Earth's natural Master Race. We're effectively gods; a Pantheon six billion strong.
Animals exist for our pleasure. Their suffering is not our concern, as animals are not human.
It is a common misconception that widescreen is any wider than 4:3. In actuality, widescreen is the same width, but the screen is _shorter_, so it has a "wider" proportion.
Thus, widescreen is really shortscreen.
Really, watch a movie made in widescreen and compare it to a 4:3 TV show. You'll notice that when there is a close-up of someone talking, the widescreen movie cuts off the top of their head , while the 4:3 TV show shows their head in full. Before anyone mentions pan-and-scan, I'll mention it's the worst of both worlds: the resolution is cut off in all four directions.
4:3 is a superior aspect ratio to widescreen; it's capable of showing more information in the same screen space. A show produced with a 4:3 camera has all the horizontal resolution of widescreen, plus extra vertical resolution. The name "widescreen" is such a misnomer; "shortscreen" is far more accurate.
I refuse to buy widescreen under any circumstances.
Guess this means I'll never buy another new laptop again.
Hmm...I wonder if I can fit the guts of a newer laptop inside my Toshiba Tecra M3's case...the mainboard on that thing is dead, so if I can use the case and screen of my M3 with the guts of a newer laptop (like the Tecra M9), that would be the only way I'd ever buy a new laptop again.
The government already _does_. It's called Eminent Domain.
Back during the Anthrax scare, the government nearly seized Bayer's patent on Cipro under Eminent Domain.
And as someone who despises both states' "rights" and intellectual "property" with a bloody passion, I'm quite torn on this. I hate anything that protects states' "rights", but I love anything that degrades copy"right".
IP phones can and do support TLS encryption over the SRTP media protocol. Not all of them use or support this feature, but TLS/SRTP calls happen.
I work at a VoIP-related company, and trust me, we deal heavily with TLS/SRTP calls.
You are being a shitting dick nipple.
Stop that.
Ron Paul only wants liberty from unfair levies and crusades in the holy land on the federal level.
Ron Paul has no problem whatsoever with unfair levies and religious crusades at the state level.
Calling both Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams "Republicans" is horribly inaccurate.
Jefferson was a Democratic-Republican since the beginning of American party politics and until the end of his life. Adams was a Democratic-Republican early in his career, but later changed affiliations when that party broke up.
In 1824, the Democratic-Republican party shattered due to a contested nomination. Andrew Jackson's faction became the Democrats (the same Democrats as today).
John Quincy Adams' faction became the National Republicans. The National Republicans merged with a group called the Whigs in 1830 and took their name. They eventually fizzled out by 1856. They had nothing to do with the modern Republican party, which was founded in 1854 as a purely anti-slavery party (it should be noted that the Whigs never took a stance on slavery either way).
Of the two factions, Jackson's Democrats followed Jefferson's ideals and so they are considered the main successor of the Democratic-Republicans. On the other hand, Adams' National Republicans/Whigs largely adopted the ideals of the deceased Federalist Party (note that Adams' father, John Adams, was a Federalist).
Of all the Presidents you mention, Bush and Grant were the only Republicans.
Gah. When I first read your post, I thought you were comparing Postgres to Solid.
*shudders*
Quite frankly, I don't want to use the same operating system as someone who refuses to edit any configuration file.
Marketing Linux to the average desktop is a bad idea. Leave Linux to the power users and the server market.
I sure as hell don't want to dream about Lucent!
Almost reminds me of the Ghost in that way. The Ghost was a communist who hated corporations; he hired himself out to other villains to do their dirty work, but gloated to himself that he loves it so much he'd do it for free.
He was Stark's ideological opposite, and a perfect foil: Stark belives that corporate power can be used to effect positive change in the world; the Ghost believes that corporate power _is_ what's wrong with the world.
Too bad the writers went the Mary Sue route and had him kill Spymaster for no other reason then to look like a badass.