They're not selling a phone, at least, not according to the ads. They're selling an excuse. Otherwise, how can it be "the phone for people who want to do other stuff than be using the phone."
They practically come right out and imply that it's going to be as buggy as an un-patched windows 95 machine...
It's very simple. You are rewarding the parents' excellence, not the kid's. The reward is that they can fund several succeeding generations and their line will flourish.
If the kid squanders it, well, that's just punishing the complete lack of excellence. Should fortunes be protected from squandering by their owners just so that the gentry never fall and the commoners never rise? Seems backwards to me.
Just, FYI, every car has headlight fluid, and you need to change it every time you change the filament. Even the new-fangled "filament-free" lights need their fluid changed, indeed the proper mixture is even more important for those lamps.
No, it's separate files. You can browse it using finder or terminal.
Unless you're backing up a filevault protected home directory. Then it handles it in just about the stupidest way possible: it saves the whole honking encrypted image as one big file.* And despite the fact that it doesn't decrypt the image, it still only works if you're logged in and the image is open.
*If you're set up as sparse images, then you do a little better. But still, no incremental backups for you. If a file changes, you have to copy the *whole* thing, because good encryption won't make it obvious which bits of the file are different. Also, I'm not sure it can tell which files are, say, disk cache for the browser....
The thing is, the military spending is the only thing that the constitution specifically authorizes*, so whatever the federal budget is, it probably should be mostly military spending.
*and at that, the only permanent force that the constitution authorizes is the navy. A large standing army is actually expressly forbidden during peacetime.
The argument that we should spend less on the military, in no way justifies the "savings" to be spent on other things. That money doesn't belong to the government to do with as it pleases.
I think, if you're going to say he's responsible for all of the company's income, then you have to have a control to compare him to. Just because he's a top decision maker for a huge company doesn't mean he's actually benefiting the company.
I think, if you're going to talk about bonuses, you should have to show why the decisions you made were more beneficial to the company than simply having a trained monkey pull levers. If I was a shareholder, that's what I'd be demanding.
Income tax is on income, not capital gains. He wouldn't have been paying income tax on his share sale anyway.
And his argument was that it would hurt his ability to attract talent. Unless by talent he meant himself I fail to see how what he does with his assets has to do with this issue.
I'd say the question is why bother encouraging people to live there with special perks, though. Is the farming like, incredible? Is there a super-dense kimberlite cone? Oil?
What is the state interest in having people there?
But, for some reason, apple decided that iTunes Music store should be a shitty, poorly formatted web page that is incredibly unresponsive to simple commands like scrolling, instead of the very clean native-UI interface they had a couple of generations ago.
And yes, I'm complaining about this from a late 2008 macbook, so I think I have a right to expect it to work well. If their goal is to convince me to get a bigger screen, then they've failed. I'm not buying a 17" notebook, ever. Especially not just to compensate for poor user interface decisions in a music organizer. It defeats the whole point of having a portable computer.
Indeed. I suspect it might go something like this: to the train company itself, sale of the scheduling data can only ever be a drop in the bucket of their revenue stream: people using that data are, presumably, actually buying tickets at some point,
But to the association, who's revenue is a mere fraction of the rail company's, the sale of licenses to the scheduling data looks like a great deal of money, if they restrict access and the rail company makes 1% less because it's less convenient, maybe the association's revenue also only drops 1%, or less, too, and it doesn't matter if that 1% the rail company loses itself dwarf's any revenue to be had from the sale of licensing of the data because the association really doesn't have any skin in the game that is proportionate to the damage they can cause.
I dunno. I've found that some of the biggest nut jobs are trying to straddle the parties. They seem to think that 1) there are only two sides to everything, and 2) the truth isn't on either of those sides, so it must be in the middle.
Better that they should all passionately hold their beliefs and lock horns all the time, never "getting anything done" than to compromise left and right until we're all slaves of the state with nothing to show for it.
When a politician talks about "getting things done," he's talking about legislative volume. More laws passed to control your behavior or appropriate your treasure.
The problem with this is that you have to know what the polls are in order to game the system like that. Also, you're a little bit evil.. for trying to game the system like that...
A proper voting system doesn't play games like the one we've got, where you've basically got to gamble on what you think other people are going to do. Elections are almost as much about what you think others want, as they are about what you really do want. And that's just wrong.
You don't have to vote for the "establishment" candidates, you know. Everyone in the country above the age limit is, technically, running for office, they just haven't declared it yet: write ins
Now, let me be clear. I'm talking about real people, who are genuinely eligible for office, not joke candidates like cartoon characters. One of those candidates is you.
So, if you really don't want to compromise and vote for someone who is unqualified, there's always one fallback candidate you can vote for: yourself. Just be sure to leave enough information so that it's unambiguous. You don't want to accidentally vote in some idiot who happens to share your last name and first initial in a low-turnout race.
It's true that we can only rely on google to protest when the preferential treatment prefers other than google, but if every company dealing with the government always bitched about everything all the other companies get away with, we'd know a lot more about what's going on, and maybe a lot less of it would be going on.
Yeah, but then MS decides not to extend the usual discounts when google is buying, so that their competitors bids all come in lower. Thus, without ever being the vendor the government deals with, Microsoft actually gets the best part of the deal: no matter what, they sell licenses AND they get to pick the winner...
So, we have to rely on vendors getting signed statements to make sure that our government officials are doing due diligence when spending our money?
It's like buying a shed and demanding all the screws be from Home Depot. As if you can't build a decent shed without Home Depot screws. Of course Google is upset, but we all should be upset, not just gloat over google's apparently making a mistake in not having the right paperwork. What is this, Brazil?
The fact is, they should have specified the desired functionality, not the underlying implementation. Let the vendors worry about the implementation details.
Unless you're listening to white noise or John Cage, and reading UUencoded dumps of/dev/random, you should feel free to tell your professor that that's what they used to say about whatever it is the HE thinks is music.
There's a reason that you like to listen to it, and making sounds you'll want to listen to is basically the goal of music theory. Similarly, making works you'll want to read is the point of literature. So there's something to learn from it if you'll just look.
But, keep in mind that filling your belly is the point of a Big Mac, and lots of people like those, as well, but they're not nearly as nourishing as other things you could eat, some of which might take some getting used to, at first. In other words, there's a lot you can learn from your professor, too.
Seems like the parent was trying to find a way to deal with meaning manglers. It's getting so that you can't say anything poetically any more because if there is any ambiguity whatsoever in what you say, people will assume you meant whatever the most loathsome interpretation of it is, and proceed to marginalize you or justify something stupid over it.
Slashdot Mirror
They're not selling a phone, at least, not according to the ads. They're selling an excuse. Otherwise, how can it be "the phone for people who want to do other stuff than be using the phone."
They practically come right out and imply that it's going to be as buggy as an un-patched windows 95 machine...
It's very simple. You are rewarding the parents' excellence, not the kid's. The reward is that they can fund several succeeding generations and their line will flourish.
If the kid squanders it, well, that's just punishing the complete lack of excellence. Should fortunes be protected from squandering by their owners just so that the gentry never fall and the commoners never rise? Seems backwards to me.
Just, FYI, every car has headlight fluid, and you need to change it every time you change the filament. Even the new-fangled "filament-free" lights need their fluid changed, indeed the proper mixture is even more important for those lamps.
No, it's separate files. You can browse it using finder or terminal.
Unless you're backing up a filevault protected home directory. Then it handles it in just about the stupidest way possible: it saves the whole honking encrypted image as one big file.* And despite the fact that it doesn't decrypt the image, it still only works if you're logged in and the image is open.
*If you're set up as sparse images, then you do a little better. But still, no incremental backups for you. If a file changes, you have to copy the *whole* thing, because good encryption won't make it obvious which bits of the file are different. Also, I'm not sure it can tell which files are, say, disk cache for the browser....
The thing is, the military spending is the only thing that the constitution specifically authorizes*, so whatever the federal budget is, it probably should be mostly military spending.
*and at that, the only permanent force that the constitution authorizes is the navy. A large standing army is actually expressly forbidden during peacetime.
The argument that we should spend less on the military, in no way justifies the "savings" to be spent on other things. That money doesn't belong to the government to do with as it pleases.
I think, if you're going to say he's responsible for all of the company's income, then you have to have a control to compare him to. Just because he's a top decision maker for a huge company doesn't mean he's actually benefiting the company.
I think, if you're going to talk about bonuses, you should have to show why the decisions you made were more beneficial to the company than simply having a trained monkey pull levers. If I was a shareholder, that's what I'd be demanding.
Income tax is on income, not capital gains. He wouldn't have been paying income tax on his share sale anyway.
And his argument was that it would hurt his ability to attract talent. Unless by talent he meant himself I fail to see how what he does with his assets has to do with this issue.
I'd say the question is why bother encouraging people to live there with special perks, though. Is the farming like, incredible? Is there a super-dense kimberlite cone? Oil?
What is the state interest in having people there?
A fancy $300 LCD TV? What can you get for $300, even today, that you would describe as "fancy?"
But, for some reason, apple decided that iTunes Music store should be a shitty, poorly formatted web page that is incredibly unresponsive to simple commands like scrolling, instead of the very clean native-UI interface they had a couple of generations ago.
And yes, I'm complaining about this from a late 2008 macbook, so I think I have a right to expect it to work well. If their goal is to convince me to get a bigger screen, then they've failed. I'm not buying a 17" notebook, ever. Especially not just to compensate for poor user interface decisions in a music organizer. It defeats the whole point of having a portable computer.
Decoding H.264 is a lot less CPU intensive than decoding H.264 in an inefficient wrapper....
Indeed. I suspect it might go something like this: to the train company itself, sale of the scheduling data can only ever be a drop in the bucket of their revenue stream: people using that data are, presumably, actually buying tickets at some point,
But to the association, who's revenue is a mere fraction of the rail company's, the sale of licenses to the scheduling data looks like a great deal of money, if they restrict access and the rail company makes 1% less because it's less convenient, maybe the association's revenue also only drops 1%, or less, too, and it doesn't matter if that 1% the rail company loses itself dwarf's any revenue to be had from the sale of licensing of the data because the association really doesn't have any skin in the game that is proportionate to the damage they can cause.
I also set the minimum font size.
As for the buttons, there is a solution for you under firefox, but you're not going to like it.
Custom, per-site user css rules.
With css, you can actually specify "an image tag, where the image is X" and then have it substitute your own image there.
The downside is that this is a very, very manual process, and you would have to do it for every site you need to tweak.
If the tables are easy to obtain, people would realize the trains aren't really running on time.
Obviously they're trying to prevent another Mussolini.
I dunno. I've found that some of the biggest nut jobs are trying to straddle the parties. They seem to think that 1) there are only two sides to everything, and 2) the truth isn't on either of those sides, so it must be in the middle.
Better that they should all passionately hold their beliefs and lock horns all the time, never "getting anything done" than to compromise left and right until we're all slaves of the state with nothing to show for it.
When a politician talks about "getting things done," he's talking about legislative volume. More laws passed to control your behavior or appropriate your treasure.
I fail to see how that's a bad thing. The problem with moderate candidates is that they're easy to compromise.
The problem with this is that you have to know what the polls are in order to game the system like that. Also, you're a little bit evil.. for trying to game the system like that...
A proper voting system doesn't play games like the one we've got, where you've basically got to gamble on what you think other people are going to do. Elections are almost as much about what you think others want, as they are about what you really do want. And that's just wrong.
You don't have to vote for the "establishment" candidates, you know. Everyone in the country above the age limit is, technically, running for office, they just haven't declared it yet: write ins
Now, let me be clear. I'm talking about real people, who are genuinely eligible for office, not joke candidates like cartoon characters. One of those candidates is you.
So, if you really don't want to compromise and vote for someone who is unqualified, there's always one fallback candidate you can vote for: yourself. Just be sure to leave enough information so that it's unambiguous. You don't want to accidentally vote in some idiot who happens to share your last name and first initial in a low-turnout race.
It's true that we can only rely on google to protest when the preferential treatment prefers other than google, but if every company dealing with the government always bitched about everything all the other companies get away with, we'd know a lot more about what's going on, and maybe a lot less of it would be going on.
Yeah, but then MS decides not to extend the usual discounts when google is buying, so that their competitors bids all come in lower. Thus, without ever being the vendor the government deals with, Microsoft actually gets the best part of the deal: no matter what, they sell licenses AND they get to pick the winner...
So, we have to rely on vendors getting signed statements to make sure that our government officials are doing due diligence when spending our money?
It's like buying a shed and demanding all the screws be from Home Depot. As if you can't build a decent shed without Home Depot screws. Of course Google is upset, but we all should be upset, not just gloat over google's apparently making a mistake in not having the right paperwork. What is this, Brazil?
The fact is, they should have specified the desired functionality, not the underlying implementation. Let the vendors worry about the implementation details.
Indeed. What kind of idiot doesn't want the vendors in a bidding war?!
Unless you're listening to white noise or John Cage, and reading UUencoded dumps of /dev/random, you should feel free to tell your professor that that's what they used to say about whatever it is the HE thinks is music.
There's a reason that you like to listen to it, and making sounds you'll want to listen to is basically the goal of music theory. Similarly, making works you'll want to read is the point of literature. So there's something to learn from it if you'll just look.
But, keep in mind that filling your belly is the point of a Big Mac, and lots of people like those, as well, but they're not nearly as nourishing as other things you could eat, some of which might take some getting used to, at first. In other words, there's a lot you can learn from your professor, too.
This the bill is 12.75, the guy gives you 20 euro and 75 cents, what change do you give him? ARrrrrrrrrrrgh WHY DID YOU GIVE ME 75 cents!
To make the math easier. Now it's just 20-12 (you can think of it as the 0.75's canceling.) You don't even have to touch the change drawer any more.
Also.. How many cents in a euro. From the name, I would've assumed 100, like we have in the US. But your example seems to indicate otherwise.
Seems like the parent was trying to find a way to deal with meaning manglers. It's getting so that you can't say anything poetically any more because if there is any ambiguity whatsoever in what you say, people will assume you meant whatever the most loathsome interpretation of it is, and proceed to marginalize you or justify something stupid over it.