Although we both know they haven't actually; they have very very tiny cameras nowadays. And the wi-fi chip to beam the signal ain't that big either. Oh wait, they already have that, if it's a drone.
Why couldn't it have had a camera? Now that I think about it, why don't we see those on the market? You sure it can't have a camera?
There is such a thing, as too tiny to be noticed, or, almost as good; "I seriously thought it was a horsefly..."
A single corporation sort of owns the internet. The one search engine we almost all use; that's about as much of the internet as one entity can own. The internet is a public possession, so therefore, their business becomes our business.
I wonder for how long that's going to be tenable, both for us and them.
They're not the government, they don't owe us an explanation for every little thing; they should be able to do whatever they want, within the law, and make a profit. Hell, make a huge profit if you can; I can buy your products or not. Maybe you're a good deal and I got to have it. Maybe I don't care.
I certainly don't want to care, on a political level, what companies do.
I still like Google. I bet that won't last forever. Even now, I don't like the fact that i have to care exactly how they implement right to be forgotten. But either way it goes, it's a big deal to most of the people on the planet.
Damn, that's a lot of power. So far, they've walked that line pretty well. Better than Microsoft, who never quite got to this level of power. Better than the East India Company, with whom they are in the same league now. I'll give them that they are still a pretty good company, doing the best they can.
Well no, it wouldn't be foster homes, would it? We're talking orphanages at that point.
You made me wonder, how bad would that be? It's got a gym and a basketball court and nobody can pick on me and there's no guns here and I can be a part of something...
When we had those, we didn't have these problems. Correlation or causation?
You sort of brought it up, and it's supposed to be a thinking website...
Teaching kids has never paid that well. It's a calling.
I don't want that job. Do you? Fucking kids, are you kidding me? Is your kid a bigger brat than mine? Unlikely, but possible. If it paid, $120K say, (I'm Rich money where I live) then I might take the job, and just hate life at work. I've done it before for a lot less. But how good of a teacher would I be?
It's an academic question, because we can't afford very many K at all per teacher. Can't afford anything really, but we must provide a living wage to people willing to take the job. Pad it with perks that give good bang for the employer buck; like healthcare, lots of time off, union, etc. That's your wage.
And it's going to be somewhat less than a fireman or a cop, who are also called to serve; that's just the way it is. When they do the job, they are priceless. Can''t pay them what they are worth if we really really wanted to.
These people take the job as a lifetime calling, and all we need to do, is to let that happen. They don't pad their resumes and move around; they would do the job for free, but they have to make a living like everybody else. And there is necessarily limited room for advancement; a school full of teachers only needs a couple of bosses.
So there is an implicit promise of retirement. We can't then, also have some sort of competitive employment environment, where a grade has to be made or else. It must be, that you have to actually be bad, to get fired as a public servant. The mediocre and average guy, who shows up on time for work everyday and does the job, is not bad. He's got no resume; he's not qualified for anything else; he deserves his retirement.
Bad teachers got fired before. Standout teachers got recognition and bonuses before, but most; they got cost of living raises for showing up year after year. That's the job. (Last thing I ever want to do is fuck with the teachers)
And I'll tell you what else we already had before, and that was a standardized test in the 8th and 12 grade, that you needed to pass to move on.
I call BS on common core, and Bill Gates is just buying his damned legacy. Andrew Carnegie he ain't.
No, I think getting out of the buggy and it being empty is why it slid. That is why he's standing there holding onto it, holding a wheel up in the air. With one hand.
I got 2 epiphanies out of it.
The rover is light as shit. I had this thought, I think, of heavy 70s hardware. Of course it was light, they had to get it there on that most rickety looking lunar lander.
One-sixth gravity is lighter than I thought it was. Hollywood slo-mo has ruined me; I didn't get what Neil hopping around all slo-mo looking really meant.
So this guy could have picked up the rover and thrown it like a Frisbee I bet. (It would have been a duff due to spacesuit interference)
Just one example of how the sanctions are nothing but good for Russia. Nobody in the West seems to get that. You can't make Russians suffer; they do that on their own.
Up is down; black is white, and Putin is brilliant. Russia will be a far stronger, richer, better country when he's done.
You've linked that almost 30 year old thing 3 times now.
Cardinal Lustiger: ''From the Christian point of view, one doesn't defend Christ with arms. Christ himself forbade it.''
Firebombs, teargas; trying to shut the theaters down without actually killing anybody.
What you've actually done with your one example, is to show that the Christians are more enlightened than the Muslims, even when they are acting badly...
When Christians show up with guns blazing, or hiding suicide bombs, or anything like that, then you might have something.
But as it stands, you couldn't be more wrong about how one group is the same as the other.
But when it is pointed out that you are wrong, and you insist on doubling down on your wrongness, and ignoring reality, then by definition, you are the moron.
Yes, some of the data in medical studies, like names and addresses, are kept secret. But the study itself, along with the data that shows whatever, is publicly available. Thus, under this bill, the EPA could use that study and the data.
I think this is about climate change and model data. The conservatives aren't in a position to challenge the models because it's a black box, and no one is allowed to see in but a very few scientists and programmers. I can't hate them for wanting to turn the software and data over to a political ally scientist and ask 'what's in it'?
My thought; if you believe a climate model can predict the future, then you have artificial intelligence, and someone should call the presses over that. I don't believe we will ever see AI out of a digital electric computer, and we sure don't have it yet. If a model shows climate change, then that just means scientists/programmer(s) think there is going to be climate change.
And they should be able to explain, verify and test using real, publicly available science. And without using the word 'model', which reminds me of when consultants use 'synergy, cloud, and leverage'.
Just for the record, I think it is obvious that burning millions of years of stored sunlight in a hundred years will affect the planet. The only thing worse than that, would be to give the left the authority to dictate our energy use.
It's not a camp man. It's just people. I hope you won't call them stupid to their face at least. Not helping.
I'd bet a dollar you don't have a kid of your own, and you haven't had to face this. Otherwise you would not be so strident in your arrogance.
I had to face it, and luckily for me, the thimerisol had already been removed when I insisted on reading the vaccine labels myself in 2001. So I also got to dodge the question.
And now I get to have my asshole opinion, which means absolutely shit, because I haven't had to face infecting the most innocent and beautiful healthy human that ever existed with heavy metals and known toxins.
Okay, I injected my kid with toxins, but at least not mercury.
And I'm not so arrogant about the anti-vaxers now.
AC is right. You don't "know" it; any more than the anti-vaxers know what they think they know. (Actually, that's not entirely accurate, at least anecdotally. I know a few anti-vaxers, they are intelligent and well-paid (make more than me), and none of them think they know anything extra, beyond what we all know.)
Both of you, you only "know", what you are told.
The difference is, they have lost their faith. That makes them apostates.
Slashdot Mirror
Although we both know they haven't actually; they have very very tiny cameras nowadays. And the wi-fi chip to beam the signal ain't that big either. Oh wait, they already have that, if it's a drone.
Why couldn't it have had a camera? Now that I think about it, why don't we see those on the market? You sure it can't have a camera?
There is such a thing, as too tiny to be noticed, or, almost as good; "I seriously thought it was a horsefly..."
Dang. I just got scared.
A single corporation sort of owns the internet. The one search engine we almost all use; that's about as much of the internet as one entity can own. The internet is a public possession, so therefore, their business becomes our business.
I wonder for how long that's going to be tenable, both for us and them.
They're not the government, they don't owe us an explanation for every little thing; they should be able to do whatever they want, within the law, and make a profit. Hell, make a huge profit if you can; I can buy your products or not. Maybe you're a good deal and I got to have it. Maybe I don't care.
I certainly don't want to care, on a political level, what companies do.
I still like Google. I bet that won't last forever. Even now, I don't like the fact that i have to care exactly how they implement right to be forgotten. But either way it goes, it's a big deal to most of the people on the planet.
Damn, that's a lot of power. So far, they've walked that line pretty well. Better than Microsoft, who never quite got to this level of power. Better than the East India Company, with whom they are in the same league now. I'll give them that they are still a pretty good company, doing the best they can.
It can't last forever. Or even very much longer.
"tens of thousands of children in foster care"
Well no, it wouldn't be foster homes, would it? We're talking orphanages at that point.
You made me wonder, how bad would that be? It's got a gym and a basketball court and nobody can pick on me and there's no guns here and I can be a part of something...
When we had those, we didn't have these problems. Correlation or causation?
You sort of brought it up, and it's supposed to be a thinking website...
Teaching kids has never paid that well. It's a calling.
I don't want that job. Do you? Fucking kids, are you kidding me? Is your kid a bigger brat than mine? Unlikely, but possible.
If it paid, $120K say, (I'm Rich money where I live) then I might take the job, and just hate life at work. I've done it before for a lot less. But how good of a teacher would I be?
It's an academic question, because we can't afford very many K at all per teacher. Can't afford anything really, but we must provide a living wage to people willing to take the job. Pad it with perks that give good bang for the employer buck; like healthcare, lots of time off, union, etc. That's your wage.
And it's going to be somewhat less than a fireman or a cop, who are also called to serve; that's just the way it is. When they do the job, they are priceless. Can''t pay them what they are worth if we really really wanted to.
These people take the job as a lifetime calling, and all we need to do, is to let that happen. They don't pad their resumes and move around; they would do the job for free, but they have to make a living like everybody else. And there is necessarily limited room for advancement; a school full of teachers only needs a couple of bosses.
So there is an implicit promise of retirement. We can't then, also have some sort of competitive employment environment, where a grade has to be made or else. It must be, that you have to actually be bad, to get fired as a public servant. The mediocre and average guy, who shows up on time for work everyday and does the job, is not bad. He's got no resume; he's not qualified for anything else; he deserves his retirement.
Bad teachers got fired before. Standout teachers got recognition and bonuses before, but most; they got cost of living raises for showing up year after year. That's the job. (Last thing I ever want to do is fuck with the teachers)
And I'll tell you what else we already had before, and that was a standardized test in the 8th and 12 grade, that you needed to pass to move on.
I call BS on common core, and Bill Gates is just buying his damned legacy. Andrew Carnegie he ain't.
You guys need to stop.
You would have had some tall rickety tricycle thing.
"Hey look, higher lunar speed!"
No, I think getting out of the buggy and it being empty is why it slid. That is why he's standing there holding onto it, holding a wheel up in the air. With one hand.
I got 2 epiphanies out of it.
The rover is light as shit. I had this thought, I think, of heavy 70s hardware. Of course it was light, they had to get it there on that most rickety looking lunar lander.
One-sixth gravity is lighter than I thought it was. Hollywood slo-mo has ruined me; I didn't get what Neil hopping around all slo-mo looking really meant.
So this guy could have picked up the rover and thrown it like a Frisbee I bet. (It would have been a duff due to spacesuit interference)
"corruption and governance problem"
Not Putin's fault. Russia has had that going way, way back.
And Russians are hard to motivate. One of the few ways I can think of, is stoking the public's fear of Europe and the West.
Hm. 10 years you say?
About time for vanilla WoW to hit Russia in a big way.
Just one example of how the sanctions are nothing but good for Russia. Nobody in the West seems to get that. You can't make Russians suffer; they do that on their own.
Up is down; black is white, and Putin is brilliant. Russia will be a far stronger, richer, better country when he's done.
Note TFA has a redshift(z) scale that is backwards. They have z=1 at 6 billion years, and z>20 at 200 million years.
Nor is it what allows you to carry a gun.
You've linked that almost 30 year old thing 3 times now.
Cardinal Lustiger: ''From the Christian point of view, one doesn't defend Christ with arms. Christ himself forbade it.''
Firebombs, teargas; trying to shut the theaters down without actually killing anybody.
What you've actually done with your one example, is to show that the Christians are more enlightened than the Muslims, even when they are acting badly...
No it doesn't stand just because you say it does.
Christian retaliations not reported by today's media?
Unlikely.
A very many of them would have been of Greek descent. Arabs didn't take the area over until long after.
But in any case, it was white people that took up the religion in the first place. Is it so evil that they painted a white dude?
He got you, but you won't admit it.
When Christians show up with guns blazing, or hiding suicide bombs, or anything like that, then you might have something.
But as it stands, you couldn't be more wrong about how one group is the same as the other.
But when it is pointed out that you are wrong, and you insist on doubling down on your wrongness, and ignoring reality, then by definition, you are the moron.
Yes, implicitly.
As in, complete theater, the politics of perception being far more important than reality. And making about a 0% difference in WH power usage.
But mostly, they just looked like shit.
No, that would be second worst. If you put my back against the wall, and force me to choose, I'm going to choose freedom.
Man, that's weak.
Yes, some of the data in medical studies, like names and addresses, are kept secret. But the study itself, along with the data that shows whatever, is publicly available. Thus, under this bill, the EPA could use that study and the data.
I think this is about climate change and model data. The conservatives aren't in a position to challenge the models because it's a black box, and no one is allowed to see in but a very few scientists and programmers. I can't hate them for wanting to turn the software and data over to a political ally scientist and ask 'what's in it'?
My thought; if you believe a climate model can predict the future, then you have artificial intelligence, and someone should call the presses over that. I don't believe we will ever see AI out of a digital electric computer, and we sure don't have it yet. If a model shows climate change, then that just means scientists/programmer(s) think there is going to be climate change.
And they should be able to explain, verify and test using real, publicly available science. And without using the word 'model', which reminds me of when consultants use 'synergy, cloud, and leverage'.
Just for the record, I think it is obvious that burning millions of years of stored sunlight in a hundred years will affect the planet. The only thing worse than that, would be to give the left the authority to dictate our energy use.
Yes, carefully releasing pressure. That's half of it. AC below got the other half (not sure if he meant to).
Lower the temperature. I was thinking fraking the perimeter would spread the heat and the surrounding earth is his heatsink...
But what if the fracking fluid itself was some cryogenically refrigerated really cold shit? That's like, a triple whammy.
Brilliant, or worst idea ever?
... that Earth creature has stolen it ...
Oh.
Actually, that is the answer.
It's not a camp man. It's just people. I hope you won't call them stupid to their face at least. Not helping.
I'd bet a dollar you don't have a kid of your own, and you haven't had to face this. Otherwise you would not be so strident in your arrogance.
I had to face it, and luckily for me, the thimerisol had already been removed when I insisted on reading the vaccine labels myself in 2001. So I also got to dodge the question.
And now I get to have my asshole opinion, which means absolutely shit, because I haven't had to face infecting the most innocent and beautiful healthy human that ever existed with heavy metals and known toxins.
Okay, I injected my kid with toxins, but at least not mercury.
And I'm not so arrogant about the anti-vaxers now.
They did quietly remove the liquid mercury, long after the anecdotal stories circulated about how kids went autistic overnight after vaccination.
I did notice that.
You're McCarthy.
You're in power, and there's a small minority of people that threaten you and your way of life.
There really were communists infiltrating Hollywood. There really are anti-vaxers that could damage herd immunity if their numbers grow large enough.
I'm just saying. You're McCarthy. Don't overreact like he did.
AC is right. You don't "know" it; any more than the anti-vaxers know what they think they know. (Actually, that's not entirely accurate, at least anecdotally. I know a few anti-vaxers, they are intelligent and well-paid (make more than me), and none of them think they know anything extra, beyond what we all know.)
Both of you, you only "know", what you are told.
The difference is, they have lost their faith. That makes them apostates.