People screw that up to. I think we need a brain scanner which determines the persons personality and interests and it will vote using that information. You just put a hat on, people couldn't possibly screw that up could they? What about people with negligable brain activity? Hmmmm....
Correction, "I'd say the fact is most people are polite cell phone users since you only here 3 rings"
here=hear
Ugh, I wonder why I keep doing that. I think I think here a lot more than I type hear so my fingers just naturally assume what I'm typing even though its wrong.
If you are the owner of the Opera house or the fancy restaurent then you have that right because it is your property. However, you must inform the people entering your premises that their phones will not work because you are interfering with it.
It is better practice to inform people of proper cell phone etiquette.
If you don't own the property people are on then it is completely illegal however
That is true, but people should be aware of their abilities to focus. I can handle driving and talking on my phone just fine because I won't let myself focus on the conversation too much. I tell the person on the other end I'm in the car so I may have to go. They generally understand if I stop talking.
I'd say most drivers do this responsibly, more and more are using hands free devices which is a major help but there are definitely those that are incapable. Then again, these are the same people that will go off the road fiddling with the radio.
I'd the fact is, most people are since you only mention hearing 3 rings. I'm aware you sometimes here more but when more than half the audience has a cell phone you should consider that they are being polite and the are the majority but they receive no attention or recognition because they follow cell phone etiquette. See Cell phone usage in DC More than 60% of that population uses cell phones.
In general I think this figure is accurate. I know people in VT are less likely to have phones than people here in AZ. I've lived in both and in both places half the people at least have cell phones and only more people are getting them.
Those people just need some lessons in fist to face contact. The same kind of person that will sit their talking all through the movie and since you mention plays the same holds true. Some people will sit through the entire thing talking. Yep, its annoying, does the cell phone have anything to do with it? No, they would just find another way to talk or otherwise distract themselves and others around them.
This is humerous simply because you completely ignored the point of the post and made a bad assumption about my education.
I was not stating fact, I was stating one of the reasons Japan used to justify their attack on us in their declaration of war just minutes prior to Pearl Harbor. I never said this reason was at all accurate only that they used it to justify their aggression which is again exactly what we were talking about so once again you are pulling this conversation away from a discussion of communication techniques to a discussion about history and completely ignoring the fact that diplomacy failed the situation because neither side was willing to compromise.
An example of diplomacy working would be the Cuban missile crisis among a few others, that's just one of the more shining example.
In other words, don't assume I know jackshit and ignore the the meaning of the post by focusing on the content which wasn't even my opinion to begin with.
I am very aware Japan did not base the document on reality hense all the public outrage of the time on top of the awe over Pearl Harbor
That depends on your perspective whether we attacked first or not. If you think that the original war being when Iraq invaded Kuwait was over then yes, you'd be right. I'm of the mind that the conflict was never settled and now action is being taken. Granted it was taken much too late and for the wrong reason. Its ironic that there were tons of legitimate reasons to go into Iraq but Bush had to use one of the bullshit ones. Man that guy bothers me, I don't think I've liked a single thing he has done since he's been in office.
He is an example of what happens when a civilized person meets an uncivilized person. Bush is of the mind that anyone that does not share is idealogy is not civilized when in fact it usually turns out to be quite the opposite.
Too bad its not off topic and you are making assumptions about my context. They went to war because they saw it as us taking their oil. That is all that matters. The U.S. government was making hard for Japan to survive so they took matters into their own hands via aggression which is what we were talking about. That directly relates to how people communicate.
That is how we act when one party is civilized and the other is not. Take WW2 Japan for example, we were taking their oil, so what did they do? Yep, they attacked us.
Fast forward 50 years, hmmm, an oil dispute again.
If both sides are willing to compromise then it works, this has happened and wars have been prevented, think Cuban Missile Crisis.
I'd say we are pretty sophisticated but when the person you are dealing with refuses to reciprocate you have to respond in kind. Just like when someone has a problem with me or I have a problem with them, I will talk to them, if they are unreasonable I will make an attempt to not interact with them again, otherwise I will have to fight to end the conflit.
He gave us a tax cut? Sorry, but he cut funding for many vital programs and continues to INCREASE spending despite cutting taxes which sends inflation flying and causes all sort of other badness.
I did not have a strong opinion of Bush for the first six months of his presidency, he wasn't doing anything. In short, he was being the president that was elected. I'll accept that he won the election and conclude that he won it by such a small margin that America sent the message they don't want massive change which he completely and utterly ignored.
Afraid both sides were pretty sad in the last election and the assessment looks pretty grim for this one too, but voting for Bush is voting for Ashcroft because Bush is inherently controlled by the ultra conservative religious right and they want someone like Ashcroft in office to "clean" up America and restore the moral values we have lost. The same people that want to define marriage as between a man and a woman despite 50%+ divorse rates.
I'd also like to add that no where did I say Ashcroft was elected; I know he was appointed but it takes a conversative to do that so there is still responsibility for putting Ashcroft in his current position.
Who said you had to vote for Kerry? Just don't vote for Bush if you don't like what he is willing to do. I'm sure there are other candidates out there that would get a much larger spotlight if people would vote their conscious but it only works when most people vote that way.
Sorry, but how so? Unemployment is much higher now in 2003. I had a steady job in 2002, wasn't until about two months ago that changed. Very thankful for freelance work right now. Also, look at gas prices, something that is definitely hurting everybody. Here in AZ we had a gas shortage not too long ago and prices during that week or so are what we are averaging now.
Sorry but I really don't agree with your assessment of this year being better than 2002
My sister who is an artist of the variety that paints maintains a full time job at a hotel so she can eat and relax enough to produce some great stuff.
That said, artists should be compensated, but the RIAA and associated big labels take serious advantage of their artists who only get a very tiny percentage of the profits. The RIAA deserves no sympathy, artists that went the route of signing with a label that has such horrid contracts need to wise up and realize there are alternatives out there like the label I used to work for: Big Heavy World.
The label recoups their costs, gives some to the artist and donates the rest to charity.
Shareholders are not asking for all of this because its only hurting IBM's ability to produce new products. All the outsourcing they are doing is murdering their research divisions and causing people to jump ship at the first opportunity. Right now IBM is working at about half capacity in Essex, VT because they fired too many people and brought no one in to replace them. Everyone is working overtime just to try to make deadlines. Of course, IBM stopped paying overtime too...
Founding principles do not have to fly off into the netherworld just because the founding fathers are gone. Think the U.S. constitution, think GE and Ford. All have had bumps, but the original intentions still exist.
It is a very good point, like I happen to know the IBM plant in VT is going from 40% outsourced to 60% outsourced by the summer, that means a lot of people are going to lose their jobs soon. Perhaps some will be encouraged to start new businesses, but I doubt it since they were all encourages to have a family life so they naturally have other concerns than just their own well being.
I have no real problem with outsourcing, but when its at the expensive of your current workforce it becomes an issue, you only end up hurting your more because you alienate the people you have already.
Might also add with IBM dropping pensions and other retirement benefits more and more people are finding that they can't retire even if they wanted to. My father was fortunate, he met the cut off date so he gets to keep his, but thousands of other people at the plant were not so lucky.
Because IBM in particular was founded on taking care of its employees, not just kicking them and ruining entire communities. There is a lot of damage done by these actions and absolutely no attempt to make it easier. Granted there is no law that says what they are doing is wrong, but it does go again James Watt's intention when he founded the company.
Also, businesses despite what I see in your post are not just about making money, if that were true I wouldn't have Christmas parties and bbqs and an owner I can go out for beers with. Sometimes its about accomplishing a goal and human resources or rather, the people you employing being a better term are your means to reach the goal. If they are successful you are successful, destory any and all vision of their future doesn't exactly help matters either.
My father works for IBM, has for 30 years, he know his time is coming and he's preparing, but he doesn't know when, will it be this summer? The fall? He has no idea how long he'll be able to stay.
No one said it was large, only that it performed a certain task. There are plenty of programs that perform one or two, even 50 tasks without having bugs in them. Medical monitoring equipment would be a good example. Besides that, with enough time you can make pretty well anything bug free, especially if you design it from the ground up logically which is where many software designers go wrong.
On the contrary, we can predict when a variable will exceed its container so it would make sense that we could predict when a computer would reach its limits. A human wouldn't have to do the job of predicting, that could be the job of a different type of computer system.
I suspect a beowolf cluster of math geeks could probably piece together the output of anything the computer would produce in the near future. The more layers of abstration the harder it will get, especially if they are using genertic algorithms which just get smarter and smarter the more they encounter.
It would be like trying to understand the output of a completely computer generated proof! Besides that, it was hard to understand cause of my typo problem with typing words that I don't mean but often start with the same two or three letters.
Slashdot Mirror
People screw that up to. I think we need a brain scanner which determines the persons personality and interests and it will vote using that information. You just put a hat on, people couldn't possibly screw that up could they? What about people with negligable brain activity? Hmmmm....
sorry but that is not a replacement for something like a cisco router or switch. I'd say this is a boost for Nortel and HP.
Correction, "I'd say the fact is most people are polite cell phone users since you only here 3 rings" here=hear
Ugh, I wonder why I keep doing that. I think I think here a lot more than I type hear so my fingers just naturally assume what I'm typing even though its wrong.It is better practice to inform people of proper cell phone etiquette.
If you don't own the property people are on then it is completely illegal howeverI'd say most drivers do this responsibly, more and more are using hands free devices which is a major help but there are definitely those that are incapable. Then again, these are the same people that will go off the road fiddling with the radio.
In general I think this figure is accurate. I know people in VT are less likely to have phones than people here in AZ. I've lived in both and in both places half the people at least have cell phones and only more people are getting them.
Those people just need some lessons in fist to face contact. The same kind of person that will sit their talking all through the movie and since you mention plays the same holds true. Some people will sit through the entire thing talking. Yep, its annoying, does the cell phone have anything to do with it? No, they would just find another way to talk or otherwise distract themselves and others around them.
An example of diplomacy working would be the Cuban missile crisis among a few others, that's just one of the more shining example.
In other words, don't assume I know jackshit and ignore the the meaning of the post by focusing on the content which wasn't even my opinion to begin with.I am very aware Japan did not base the document on reality hense all the public outrage of the time on top of the awe over Pearl Harbor
That is exactly what I said! I didn't say their perspective was based in reality. Seriously, people need to stop making assumptions.
He is an example of what happens when a civilized person meets an uncivilized person. Bush is of the mind that anyone that does not share is idealogy is not civilized when in fact it usually turns out to be quite the opposite.
I'm with you in your hopes as well as my vote.So no, you're not excused.
Fast forward 50 years, hmmm, an oil dispute again.
If both sides are willing to compromise then it works, this has happened and wars have been prevented, think Cuban Missile Crisis.I'd say we are pretty sophisticated but when the person you are dealing with refuses to reciprocate you have to respond in kind. Just like when someone has a problem with me or I have a problem with them, I will talk to them, if they are unreasonable I will make an attempt to not interact with them again, otherwise I will have to fight to end the conflit.
I did not have a strong opinion of Bush for the first six months of his presidency, he wasn't doing anything. In short, he was being the president that was elected. I'll accept that he won the election and conclude that he won it by such a small margin that America sent the message they don't want massive change which he completely and utterly ignored.
Afraid both sides were pretty sad in the last election and the assessment looks pretty grim for this one too, but voting for Bush is voting for Ashcroft because Bush is inherently controlled by the ultra conservative religious right and they want someone like Ashcroft in office to "clean" up America and restore the moral values we have lost. The same people that want to define marriage as between a man and a woman despite 50%+ divorse rates.I'd also like to add that no where did I say Ashcroft was elected; I know he was appointed but it takes a conversative to do that so there is still responsibility for putting Ashcroft in his current position.
Who said you had to vote for Kerry? Just don't vote for Bush if you don't like what he is willing to do. I'm sure there are other candidates out there that would get a much larger spotlight if people would vote their conscious but it only works when most people vote that way.
grrr at my cursed typo syndrome. 2003 = 2004
Sorry but I really don't agree with your assessment of this year being better than 2002
That said, artists should be compensated, but the RIAA and associated big labels take serious advantage of their artists who only get a very tiny percentage of the profits. The RIAA deserves no sympathy, artists that went the route of signing with a label that has such horrid contracts need to wise up and realize there are alternatives out there like the label I used to work for: Big Heavy World.
The label recoups their costs, gives some to the artist and donates the rest to charity.Founding principles do not have to fly off into the netherworld just because the founding fathers are gone. Think the U.S. constitution, think GE and Ford. All have had bumps, but the original intentions still exist.
I have no real problem with outsourcing, but when its at the expensive of your current workforce it becomes an issue, you only end up hurting your more because you alienate the people you have already.
Might also add with IBM dropping pensions and other retirement benefits more and more people are finding that they can't retire even if they wanted to. My father was fortunate, he met the cut off date so he gets to keep his, but thousands of other people at the plant were not so lucky.wow, I apologize for the crappy wording of this
Also, businesses despite what I see in your post are not just about making money, if that were true I wouldn't have Christmas parties and bbqs and an owner I can go out for beers with. Sometimes its about accomplishing a goal and human resources or rather, the people you employing being a better term are your means to reach the goal. If they are successful you are successful, destory any and all vision of their future doesn't exactly help matters either.
My father works for IBM, has for 30 years, he know his time is coming and he's preparing, but he doesn't know when, will it be this summer? The fall? He has no idea how long he'll be able to stay.No one said it was large, only that it performed a certain task. There are plenty of programs that perform one or two, even 50 tasks without having bugs in them. Medical monitoring equipment would be a good example. Besides that, with enough time you can make pretty well anything bug free, especially if you design it from the ground up logically which is where many software designers go wrong.
On the contrary, we can predict when a variable will exceed its container so it would make sense that we could predict when a computer would reach its limits. A human wouldn't have to do the job of predicting, that could be the job of a different type of computer system.
I suspect a beowolf cluster of math geeks could probably piece together the output of anything the computer would produce in the near future. The more layers of abstration the harder it will get, especially if they are using genertic algorithms which just get smarter and smarter the more they encounter.
It would be like trying to understand the output of a completely computer generated proof! Besides that, it was hard to understand cause of my typo problem with typing words that I don't mean but often start with the same two or three letters.