All my life I have shared your opinion, but I'll be 50 pretty soon. Hell yes I'm joining AARP, just for the discounts alone (a single weekend of hotel discount pays for a whole year of membership). I'm going to be allowed to use the exercise machines at my municipal senior centers too, so maybe next election I'll vote for those bonds instead of the usual voting against them.
I'm totally going to start exploiting every stupid edge that previous old people (my former enemies) left in place for me. I might even start to soften up on social security; maybe we do need to keep that around instead of dismantling it. One thing's for sure: you aren't paying enough into it! (I'm just thinking about your future; heavens-to-betsie, why do you think I intend to raid your fund myself? No, we'll just borrow from it during anomalous periods of budget crisis, but I promise we'll always put the money back after the emergencies are over.)
And as for lawns, oh yes: keep the fuck off them, please.
I'd think that there other big correlations with wealth. Being born into a wealthy family.
Ok, so your change request as a Business Analyst at Tinder, is that you're going to modify the form, so that where it currently asks for users' DoB, you're going to replace that with "How much money does your family have?" because we're changing the strategy that we're going to use to optimize the market-segmentation use case.
Some "routine tasks," such as issuing tickets for failure to stop at a stop sign, can be automated
In the past (at least where I live) the way that robocops got fucked up, was that they issued civil citations as a means of circumventing due process. This really pissed a lot of people off, since it was so blatantly illegal. Apparently the reason they did this, was that they were sure they would lose the case if it went to criminal court. I was never quite sure why that was, something about not having even a single witness for the prosecution, or something like that.
How can a Ford patent fix this? The problems are legal, not technical.
Why wouldn't you want to order a Ford or GM (or Toyota or whatever) directly, instead of having to go through a middleman? Are these laws pure corruption or is there some way to look at them in the best light, where they serve the peoples' interests?
Except one of them is backed by the might of the United States government
Is the dollar really backed by the might of the US government? I have seen inflation all my life. I don't even get to point my finger at a one particular party or president (unless I once again just lump 'em into "Republicrats").
If the US government has the power to protect the dollar, it hasn't been using it. So it effectively doesn't exist.
Not that I'm really complaining about dollars (it happens to be my most-convenient, favorite currency), but I think most of dollars' utility is coming from its users' faith. And if the US government is playing a role, it's in opposition to the dollar, and they're the ones who are generally responsible for inflation!
I guess if you look at it purely as a contest between two particular advocates, then yes.
But there might have been more going on, such as other advocates for those candidates (and other candidates), possibly even the candidates themselves, voters' opinions, etc.
When Republicans talk about "States rights", they really mean the right of states to pass laws that discriminate against people.
Conversely Democrats hate states experimenting with policies and love gigantic command and control from Washington.
It sounds like you two guys have found some common ground. Can you agree that you're going to start voting against Democrats and Republicans (as well as doing anything else you can, to undermine this party), instead of continuing to vote for (ans otherwise support) them?
What did the FCC do that prevents states from enacting net neutrality
It depends on whether or not you think there is any such thing as intrastate commerce.
If you think intrastate commerce is a real thing that exists, and therefore SCOTUS might be disobeyed (as is happening with marijuana legalization, for example), then they haven't done anything to prevent it, because we didn't yet enact an amendment to the US constitution to give FCC this new power that they're demanding.
But if you think SCOTUS will be obeyed (i.e. ALL activities that anyone can conceive of, are always interstate commerce, there are no limits to federal power except for things explicitly forbidden in the constitution, the framers had absolutely nothing in mind when they wrote the 10th amendment), then the thing that they did to take that power away from the states was to give the recent unpopular order.
Here is the FCC's order (PDF), and the relevant part is in section III(E)(7) (paragraph 194) on page 117 of that PDF. HTH.
Incorrect. If I simply overwrite data, it's gone - it is irreversible. The simplest example is setting a pixel to black; the algorithm is completely lossy - you can never reconstruct the original pixel.
Apparently the big story here is this: though he couldn't do it, he thought he should have used Twitter, instead of the state's website or the directly contacting the news media (by email or phone) or something like that. Twitter is what came to his mind. You sure that isn't weird/interesting?
How would your group of ISPs handle defectors? All it takes is for one of them to be a for-profit business, and then instead of closing in Montana like all the other ISPs, they just comply with the law and get all the business.
Imagine you ran one of the ISPs implementing your plan. You kiss your wife goodbye that morning, knowing that when you come home later, you'll be unemployed, but at least you'll have had the spiteful last word and Montana won't have any ISPs anymore. You'll win. All that copper and fiber will be silent. You arrive to work for the last time. Your company is in violation of the terrible law, and you wait, and finally: there is the mailman with the certified letter! You open it, as a mere formality: "Yadda yada, cease and desist, fines will accrue, yadda yadda" IT'S ON!!
You compose your devastating reply to the state government: "my way or the highway. So long, suckers!!" and you pull the plug. There's an eery silence when you realize all the fans that you used to ignore, are now silent. Montana does not have Internet. You chuckle sadistically. You won. You would check with your partners to see if they pulled their plugs too, but you have no connectivity at the office anymore, so you have to just assume that everyone kept faith.
You go home. Gonna be a stay-at-home-dad now. No internet to amuse you, but no unfair regulations either. Gonna live Ted Kaczynski style. Yes, you won. You pull into the driveway.
Huh. That's funny. There's a flyer on your door. "Sign up for Cajun Net, Montana's only ISP!" That bastard Cajun Hell. He said he was going to go out of business too, but instead he decided to comply with the law and take all the money. GREED. Fucking greed. Why does greed have to ruin everything?!?
You decide, "We'll see about this! I'll just give Cajun Hell a call. We had a suicide pact and he fucking welched!" (And yes, this is exactly the kind of thing I would do to you. I'm a bad man!) You're about to angrily stomp through the door before you realize the phone isn't going to work, and your mobile should be down too-- wait, you pull out your mobile phone and it's up. Shit, did Cajun Hell already buy all the accounts? Is he taking all the mobile money too? Fuck!! "Well, I'll just make one last phone call on this thing, to cancel my account!" Oh, this is going to be good. You are going to give the customer service rep such a berating. Ha!
After your phone call where you abuse my innocent CSR, you remind yourself: You won. You tear up the flyer. You explain to your wife and kids that we don't need any stinking Internet access. They're a distraction anyway. It's time to get back to your bible studies. You won!
And whereever I am, whatever I'm doing, I feel the pinprick of your spite on my neck. Your anger has physically manifest. Finally, I will pay for my treachery! But just then, I use one of your former customers' hundred dollar bills to rub my neck. Aaahh, it's gone. You lost.
I am spamming this to 3 non Intel threads in retaliation
A pro-spam shill posted some spam, so I need to post some Intel-shilling propaganda to three unrelated threads. Anyone have suggestions one what threads I should pollute with my unofficial Intel ads?
So, somebody makes new content on Youtube, but Google gets all of the ad revenue from their content. That makes no sense whatsoever.
You're right, it makes no sense. We need to find out why people are making content and uploading it to someone else's website (e.g. Youtube) for that website owner to make money on. Is it pure selflessness, or is Youtube using force or threats or blackmail to make them do it against their will?
Why doesn't Nintendo just allow people to use these computers as they see fit? Why must one always struggle for freedom from the Dear Leader?
It's because prior to this, when they (and most other manufacturers) spent lots of extra work and trouble designing the computer to be unusually user-hostile, the consequences were that shoppers threw money at them.
I think people shouldn't be buying computers that were specifically made to be worse than they could be, where extra effort was put into making the computer break and not work quite right. But that's just my stupid fucking opinion, explains the market.
Sometimes I think I have strayed a bit much from the path of wisdom, and become a little too much of a lazy bastard. And it's the worst, when we're thinking about "grubhubbing," usually because I'm too impaired to cook or drive.
Then I get on the Internet, read stuff like this, and feel a lot better. On an absolute scale, I consider myself to be a wreck of an irresponsible, underachieving, criminally-lazy dimwit. But relatively, I feel downright smug! Meet the driver out front!?
That's no problem at all! Thank you, Internet.
Music today is made with the intent of creating a 'hit' song. Using formulas that have worked in the 80's/90's. The music that was made by garage bands, one hit wonders were created by talented artists who just wanted to make a song that 'they' liked, they weren't making it in order to 'sell' it.
No. Some of today's music is made with the intent to create hit songs, and some is made in garages, some is made by talented people and some is made by lameasses. It was exactly the same 20, 40, and 60 years ago. None of those things have changed.
Some researchers concentrated on a tiny niche (the "Pop" genre, which will never amount to representing even 1% of music) and found something different over time. That's kind of interesting, but it doesn't really say anything about how/if the big picture of music is changing. They could have just as easily picked a different genre (metal, country, whatever) and now-vs-then song analysis might have found anything.
If the various taxing governments thought this was a good idea, then this story wouldn't be happening. The premise is that we are going to have a sales tax, whether some people dislike its regressiveness or not. They want the money.
If I take money from people all over the country and put things in the US mail to those people, you can totally make an argument that I should be paying my share of taxes, sure. I can't deny that. But I should be filing 50 tax forms in 50 states? Fuck that, I'd just stop trying to run an interstate business.
If SCOTUS rules for the 50 state taxes, then I think that immediately creates an emergency where Congress needs to pre-empt all that, and boom: we'll have a national sales tax. (And probably some twisted way that it's paid back to the states, almost certainly with some abuses.) Can't say I want that tax, but it's probably better than the alternatives. Lesser of 51 evils, you might say.;-)
The summary suggests the sales have gone down by a few percent. The headline suggests the sales have gone to about zero.
Using these two "facts" I can deduce that PC sales have always been nearly zero, a shithole market. You can question my stability, but you can't question my genius.
Slashdot Mirror
All my life I have shared your opinion, but I'll be 50 pretty soon. Hell yes I'm joining AARP, just for the discounts alone (a single weekend of hotel discount pays for a whole year of membership). I'm going to be allowed to use the exercise machines at my municipal senior centers too, so maybe next election I'll vote for those bonds instead of the usual voting against them.
I'm totally going to start exploiting every stupid edge that previous old people (my former enemies) left in place for me. I might even start to soften up on social security; maybe we do need to keep that around instead of dismantling it. One thing's for sure: you aren't paying enough into it! (I'm just thinking about your future; heavens-to-betsie, why do you think I intend to raid your fund myself? No, we'll just borrow from it during anomalous periods of budget crisis, but I promise we'll always put the money back after the emergencies are over.)
And as for lawns, oh yes: keep the fuck off them, please.
Ok, so your change request as a Business Analyst at Tinder, is that you're going to modify the form, so that where it currently asks for users' DoB, you're going to replace that with "How much money does your family have?" because we're changing the strategy that we're going to use to optimize the market-segmentation use case.
In the past (at least where I live) the way that robocops got fucked up, was that they issued civil citations as a means of circumventing due process. This really pissed a lot of people off, since it was so blatantly illegal. Apparently the reason they did this, was that they were sure they would lose the case if it went to criminal court. I was never quite sure why that was, something about not having even a single witness for the prosecution, or something like that.
How can a Ford patent fix this? The problems are legal, not technical.
Why wouldn't you want to order a Ford or GM (or Toyota or whatever) directly, instead of having to go through a middleman? Are these laws pure corruption or is there some way to look at them in the best light, where they serve the peoples' interests?
Is the dollar really backed by the might of the US government? I have seen inflation all my life. I don't even get to point my finger at a one particular party or president (unless I once again just lump 'em into "Republicrats").
If the US government has the power to protect the dollar, it hasn't been using it. So it effectively doesn't exist.
Not that I'm really complaining about dollars (it happens to be my most-convenient, favorite currency), but I think most of dollars' utility is coming from its users' faith. And if the US government is playing a role, it's in opposition to the dollar, and they're the ones who are generally responsible for inflation!
I guess if you look at it purely as a contest between two particular advocates, then yes.
But there might have been more going on, such as other advocates for those candidates (and other candidates), possibly even the candidates themselves, voters' opinions, etc.
It sounds like you two guys have found some common ground. Can you agree that you're going to start voting against Democrats and Republicans (as well as doing anything else you can, to undermine this party), instead of continuing to vote for (ans otherwise support) them?
It depends on whether or not you think there is any such thing as intrastate commerce.
If you think intrastate commerce is a real thing that exists, and therefore SCOTUS might be disobeyed (as is happening with marijuana legalization, for example), then they haven't done anything to prevent it, because we didn't yet enact an amendment to the US constitution to give FCC this new power that they're demanding.
But if you think SCOTUS will be obeyed (i.e. ALL activities that anyone can conceive of, are always interstate commerce, there are no limits to federal power except for things explicitly forbidden in the constitution, the framers had absolutely nothing in mind when they wrote the 10th amendment), then the thing that they did to take that power away from the states was to give the recent unpopular order.
Here is the FCC's order (PDF), and the relevant part is in section III(E)(7) (paragraph 194) on page 117 of that PDF. HTH.
Uncrop.
Forget Bill; imagine the forbidden love of Hillary and Donald overflowing, spilling its star-crossed passion all over your screen.
Apparently the big story here is this: though he couldn't do it, he thought he should have used Twitter, instead of the state's website or the directly contacting the news media (by email or phone) or something like that. Twitter is what came to his mind. You sure that isn't weird/interesting?
How would your group of ISPs handle defectors? All it takes is for one of them to be a for-profit business, and then instead of closing in Montana like all the other ISPs, they just comply with the law and get all the business.
Imagine you ran one of the ISPs implementing your plan. You kiss your wife goodbye that morning, knowing that when you come home later, you'll be unemployed, but at least you'll have had the spiteful last word and Montana won't have any ISPs anymore. You'll win. All that copper and fiber will be silent. You arrive to work for the last time. Your company is in violation of the terrible law, and you wait, and finally: there is the mailman with the certified letter! You open it, as a mere formality: "Yadda yada, cease and desist, fines will accrue, yadda yadda" IT'S ON!!
You compose your devastating reply to the state government: "my way or the highway. So long, suckers!!" and you pull the plug. There's an eery silence when you realize all the fans that you used to ignore, are now silent. Montana does not have Internet. You chuckle sadistically. You won. You would check with your partners to see if they pulled their plugs too, but you have no connectivity at the office anymore, so you have to just assume that everyone kept faith.
You go home. Gonna be a stay-at-home-dad now. No internet to amuse you, but no unfair regulations either. Gonna live Ted Kaczynski style. Yes, you won. You pull into the driveway.
Huh. That's funny. There's a flyer on your door. "Sign up for Cajun Net, Montana's only ISP!" That bastard Cajun Hell. He said he was going to go out of business too, but instead he decided to comply with the law and take all the money. GREED. Fucking greed. Why does greed have to ruin everything?!?
You decide, "We'll see about this! I'll just give Cajun Hell a call. We had a suicide pact and he fucking welched!" (And yes, this is exactly the kind of thing I would do to you. I'm a bad man!) You're about to angrily stomp through the door before you realize the phone isn't going to work, and your mobile should be down too-- wait, you pull out your mobile phone and it's up. Shit, did Cajun Hell already buy all the accounts? Is he taking all the mobile money too? Fuck!! "Well, I'll just make one last phone call on this thing, to cancel my account!" Oh, this is going to be good. You are going to give the customer service rep such a berating. Ha!
After your phone call where you abuse my innocent CSR, you remind yourself: You won. You tear up the flyer. You explain to your wife and kids that we don't need any stinking Internet access. They're a distraction anyway. It's time to get back to your bible studies. You won!
And whereever I am, whatever I'm doing, I feel the pinprick of your spite on my neck. Your anger has physically manifest. Finally, I will pay for my treachery! But just then, I use one of your former customers' hundred dollar bills to rub my neck. Aaahh, it's gone. You lost.
Don't let this happen to you. No suicide pacts!
If you're anything like me, you'd buy it because it's about as good as a new card, but cheaper.
Who is the enemy? Is it the people who vote for the wrong candidates? (i.e. the people who disagree with me)
A pro-spam shill posted some spam, so I need to post some Intel-shilling propaganda to three unrelated threads. Anyone have suggestions one what threads I should pollute with my unofficial Intel ads?
Makes me want to say "business as usual" but I'm too embarrassed to say usual for who.
The head manager handles that.
You're right, it makes no sense. We need to find out why people are making content and uploading it to someone else's website (e.g. Youtube) for that website owner to make money on. Is it pure selflessness, or is Youtube using force or threats or blackmail to make them do it against their will?
It's because prior to this, when they (and most other manufacturers) spent lots of extra work and trouble designing the computer to be unusually user-hostile, the consequences were that shoppers threw money at them.
I think people shouldn't be buying computers that were specifically made to be worse than they could be, where extra effort was put into making the computer break and not work quite right. But that's just my stupid fucking opinion, explains the market.
You call that awkward? Dude, if you can smell it on him, that means he can't smell it on you!
Sometimes I think I have strayed a bit much from the path of wisdom, and become a little too much of a lazy bastard. And it's the worst, when we're thinking about "grubhubbing," usually because I'm too impaired to cook or drive.
Then I get on the Internet, read stuff like this, and feel a lot better. On an absolute scale, I consider myself to be a wreck of an irresponsible, underachieving, criminally-lazy dimwit. But relatively, I feel downright smug! Meet the driver out front!? That's no problem at all! Thank you, Internet.
No. Some of today's music is made with the intent to create hit songs, and some is made in garages, some is made by talented people and some is made by lameasses. It was exactly the same 20, 40, and 60 years ago. None of those things have changed.
Some researchers concentrated on a tiny niche (the "Pop" genre, which will never amount to representing even 1% of music) and found something different over time. That's kind of interesting, but it doesn't really say anything about how/if the big picture of music is changing. They could have just as easily picked a different genre (metal, country, whatever) and now-vs-then song analysis might have found anything.
If the various taxing governments thought this was a good idea, then this story wouldn't be happening. The premise is that we are going to have a sales tax, whether some people dislike its regressiveness or not. They want the money.
If I take money from people all over the country and put things in the US mail to those people, you can totally make an argument that I should be paying my share of taxes, sure. I can't deny that. But I should be filing 50 tax forms in 50 states? Fuck that, I'd just stop trying to run an interstate business.
If SCOTUS rules for the 50 state taxes, then I think that immediately creates an emergency where Congress needs to pre-empt all that, and boom: we'll have a national sales tax. (And probably some twisted way that it's paid back to the states, almost certainly with some abuses.) Can't say I want that tax, but it's probably better than the alternatives. Lesser of 51 evils, you might say. ;-)
The summary suggests the sales have gone down by a few percent. The headline suggests the sales have gone to about zero.
Using these two "facts" I can deduce that PC sales have always been nearly zero, a shithole market. You can question my stability, but you can't question my genius.