Depends on your particular religion, I guess. The pious tend to think that the verdict is always guilty, and that it's just a matter of being able to find someone else to be punished in your place.
Oh come on. Watch some of his videos. You could get pretty drunk taking a shot every time he says something along the lines of "... but that doesn't mean it's actually true."
Your vote would indeed count in IA, but it wouldn't count more than anyone else's.
Electing the president based on popular vote would not affect the outcome of most elections. The only ones it would change are those where the EC vote goes to a candidate other than the popular vote winner. Right now the EC vote wins disagreements. The plan is to make the popular vote supreme. What's the problem?
That might be better than the current situation, where the people in large cities are ignored because they're safe for one party or another. California (55), Texas (34) and New York (31) get zero attention during the campaign despite having over 20% of the electors. Instead the targets are states like Nevada (5), New Mexico (5), Iowa (7), New Hampshire (4), etc. They don't care about the 'country as a whole' now, and they wouldn't with a strict popular vote either, but at least more people would be looked at.
The bells and whistles nobody uses...
on
Less Is Moore
·
· Score: 3, Interesting
sacrificing the bells and whistles that are offered by conventional software that hardly anyone uses anyway
I think if you took out all the features that 'hardly anyone uses' you wouldn't have much of a product left.
Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth
Same way everyone else has for the past few years. If you've got a pen and a pulse, you can get a million dollar mortgage, or at least you could until the people who did that found that $15k/month is a bit beyond their means.
Having personally voted Libertarian in the past three elections and having never voted Republican, I would say there are more people voting Libertarian than Republican.
The California constitution has two sorts of changes: amendments, which as previously noted require only a majority of voters, and revisions, which require the voter approval in addition to a 2/3 legislative majority in each house. Unfortunately, damned if I can figure out what it means to be a "revision" vs. an "amendment".
I can. Fundamentalists don't want civil unions either, and they won't be happy until being gay is a capital offense. Compromise with people who are opposed to your mere existence is not going to fly.
You could have said the same thing about overturning slavery in the 1800's. Also historical, also supported by social conservatives, also doomed to eventual failure. The people who oppose gay marriage are dying off and being replaced by the more open-minded. Apparently a small majority of Californians prefer to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.
That said, I highly doubt Google has a leg to stand on... if it gets overturned it'll be because it was ruled a revision, not because it was harmful to the economy.
Correct. If the creator is either manually choosing the mutations, or manually selecting the 'best' one for the next generation, then it's guided. Setting up the environment and hitting "go" does not constitute guidance.
That might work a lot better for people vaccinating themselves, but when it's a third party who pays for your bad decision, well, that's a lot more justifiable, now isn't it?
Just keep in mind that some of you didn't survive, and are no longer hear to point out the effectiveness of all these things you didn't have around then.
Computer scientists get paid more because that's what the market decided. Remember, the government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid computer scientists' wallets and give it to the HHD'ers.
Slashdot Mirror
Give it a thousand years and it'll be mainstream. Just like all the others.
Depends on your particular religion, I guess. The pious tend to think that the verdict is always guilty, and that it's just a matter of being able to find someone else to be punished in your place.
Yes, deterrence works fairly well against a country. God help you when it's a terrorist group that gets hold of one.
Depending on whose head that went *whoosh*ing over, Hitchens did speak at the Vatican when they were considering the beatification of Mother Teresa.
Depending on whose head this went *whoosh*ing over, Hitchens did speak at the Vatican as an advocate against the beatification of Mother Teresa.
Religion makes up stories that explain the unknown, and then complains when Science comes along and does a better job.
wishful thinking
Oh come on. Watch some of his videos. You could get pretty drunk taking a shot every time he says something along the lines of "... but that doesn't mean it's actually true."
You're right. The selection of the President should only be done by highly-motivated special-interest groups and lobbyists.
Electing the president based on popular vote would not affect the outcome of most elections. The only ones it would change are those where the EC vote goes to a candidate other than the popular vote winner. Right now the EC vote wins disagreements. The plan is to make the popular vote supreme. What's the problem?
That might be better than the current situation, where the people in large cities are ignored because they're safe for one party or another. California (55), Texas (34) and New York (31) get zero attention during the campaign despite having over 20% of the electors. Instead the targets are states like Nevada (5), New Mexico (5), Iowa (7), New Hampshire (4), etc. They don't care about the 'country as a whole' now, and they wouldn't with a strict popular vote either, but at least more people would be looked at.
sacrificing the bells and whistles that are offered by conventional software that hardly anyone uses anyway
I think if you took out all the features that 'hardly anyone uses' you wouldn't have much of a product left. Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth
Same way everyone else has for the past few years. If you've got a pen and a pulse, you can get a million dollar mortgage, or at least you could until the people who did that found that $15k/month is a bit beyond their means.
Yes, it's called don't play them. Instead, go yell at kids to get off your lawn.
If they stole the PC they have the magic wand of Physical Access and you're pretty much sunk to begin with.
Having personally voted Libertarian in the past three elections and having never voted Republican, I would say there are more people voting Libertarian than Republican.
The California constitution has two sorts of changes: amendments, which as previously noted require only a majority of voters, and revisions, which require the voter approval in addition to a 2/3 legislative majority in each house. Unfortunately, damned if I can figure out what it means to be a "revision" vs. an "amendment".
I can. Fundamentalists don't want civil unions either, and they won't be happy until being gay is a capital offense. Compromise with people who are opposed to your mere existence is not going to fly.
That said, I highly doubt Google has a leg to stand on... if it gets overturned it'll be because it was ruled a revision, not because it was harmful to the economy.
Correct. If the creator is either manually choosing the mutations, or manually selecting the 'best' one for the next generation, then it's guided. Setting up the environment and hitting "go" does not constitute guidance.
That might work a lot better for people vaccinating themselves, but when it's a third party who pays for your bad decision, well, that's a lot more justifiable, now isn't it?
Spelling is dificult.
Just keep in mind that some of you didn't survive, and are no longer hear to point out the effectiveness of all these things you didn't have around then.
And Gustafson's Law tells us that as the problem size increases the non-parallelizable portion of the program will shrink.
Computer scientists get paid more because that's what the market decided. Remember, the government is not your daddy. Its purpose is not to raid computer scientists' wallets and give it to the HHD'ers.
No, three cannibals.