IBM did nothing more than sell Germany the same census equipment that they sold the rest of the world, most of it before the Nazis came to power. It was how the Nazis used it that was evil, not that the equipment existed in the first place or that it was IBM who had sold it.
And, they want to keep a record on you, which they will update with information they buy from other companies, in order to market to you for the rest of your natural life. (And probably beyond that, even.)
A report published by Timbro claims that most U.S. states individually have a higher GDP than most European states.
Somewhere I've seen a report that says the average poor family in the U.S. is better off than the average middle-class family in Sweden, but I can't find that one right now. The Wall St. Journal's Opinion Journal site does refer to this in an article, though: "[T]he percentage of Americans living below the poverty line has dropped to 12% from 22% since 1959. In 1999, 25% of American households were considered 'low income,' meaning they had an annual income of less than $25,000. If Sweden--the very model of a modern welfare state--were judged by the same standard, about 40% of its households would be considered low-income."
What is this "cul?"
http://dict.die.net/cul/ says there are two meanings:
1) a noun, meaning "a passage with access only at one end."
2) a verb-acronym, meaning "see you later."
Cul is also the slang French word for "ass."
So...rediculous could also mean: "your ass is worth doing twice again."
I'll be in the other room until everyone has finished with your ass. I really don't need to see it.
In every state in the U.S., you can go to court and file a civil case against the miscreant (generally filed against "John Doe" since you don't know who it is yet), presumably for credit card fraud, then have the court issue a subpoena to the ISP. Once you have the info back from the ISP, you can either continue the civil case yourself or see if the local district attorney is interested.
I've been using BitDefender (by SoftWin) for a little while, and while AVG and avast! are good, I like BitDefender better. It's more user-configurable, and I think the interface is less obnoxious. I haven't yet had it fail to detect a virus that makes it through my ISP's e-mail filters.
The problems is that BG uses it when they shouldn't. Occasional use of the technique is fine, and I agree that it can add to the atmosphere of a scene. but BG uses it all the freakin' time! I once tried to time how many minutes of show time in one particular episode they did this, but had to give up when I counted more than 10 minutes.
It also is a useful way to focus on a given character or situation,
I disagree. The way BG uses the technique, I can't focus on the scene at all.
Why am I the only one who can't stand this? Do you guys actually like it?
No to both. I pretty much gave up on the show just before the end of the first season, and the horrendously annoying camera work was at the top of my list of reasons. I can't watch something that I can't see.
Yeah, I said list of reasons. I haven't watched an episode since I gave up on it, and nothing I've read anywhere has induced me to even try any more episodes.
If it wasn't sufficient inducement that a state would be shooting itself in the foot by assuring it was under-represented in the Senate, I don't see how blocking state elections is going to help.
Except that this is precisely what happened over and over again. Sometimes state legislatures were unable to elect a senator for years at a time. And, since most politicians live just to get reelected, by threatening them with the loss of their job might be just the incentive needed to help them reach a consensus.
I also don't think it a good idea to allow the Federal Government more power over state elections....
You have it backwards--repealing the 17th amendment would give state governments more power over federal elections.
Besides, what this is essentially doing is locking the current legislators into their jobs. This is supposed to prod them how?
If you're referring to the idea of repealing the 17th amendment, that would block them from their jobs, not lock them in.
The disadvantages of a popularly elected Senate are so manifest that it ought to be relatively easy to repeal the 17th, but for the fact it would be "less democratic".
Yeah, that's the speed bump in the idea. I don't really agree with it, though, since "we the people" will still be fully represented in the House.
(Of course, there would probably need to be an extra provision to prevent the problems of the past, where each house in bicameral state legislatures was held by opposing parties, and they couldn't agree on a senator. This would be simple, though. Include a provision in which, if a senator wasn't chosen by election day, no member of the state legislature could be reelected.)
the point of the Senate was an unelected body that was separated from politics. (Which is why certain types of decisions pass through the Senate--such as the approval of judge appointments.)
Partially correct. The other part is that, as a union of states, part of the federal legislature needed to represent the interests of the state legislatures, and that was the job of the Senate.
In with all of the kneejerk babble throughout this thread, there are some decent points, among which are that, for all our flaws, the U.S. still provides the best protection for freedom of speech in the world.
I think this episode provides a prime example of why main control of the root servers should remain with the U.S. Imagine what Canadian (or German or French) courts might consider doing if the Internet root servers were under their jurisdiction.
Speech is only free if you can say it *despite* whether or not it offends someone else. Canada has shown that she will pick and choose what type of speech is permitted by the government, the very antithesis of the concept of "free speech." Note that nothing in "free speech" obligates anyone else to listen to you.
Atlanta has a rail and subway system, Marta, but it doesn't really blanket the city all that well. I have a friend who lives down there and it's a 20 minute drive to work, even in the thick traffic, and 45 minute train ride with two transfers.
I live in one of the Atlanta suburbs, and have had occasion to take MARTA trains from time to time. I'm not impressed in the slightest. One of the running jokes about the MARTA trains is that they go from where nobody lives to where nobody works.
Even if it were possible for me to take a MARTA train to work, I doubt I would, for personal and political reasons.
There's a discussion about this very subject going on on the IMC's discussion list for OpenPGP. From reading the posts, particularly the ones by PGP's Jon Callas, I don't think that PGP has officially decided to implement this change just yet. (On the list, the thread titled "SHA-1 broken" is the one you will want to follow.)
I can't find the links now, but in the past I've read several articles which mention the mechanics of an Earth-Moon shot. Those article mention that, due to the orbit of the moon and the rotation of the Earth, 1969 was one of the optimal years for carrying the most payload to the moon with the least amount of fuel, and (IIRC) this optimal timeframe is on roughly a 30-year cycle.
Whether or not the Apollo program engineers knew this at the time, I do not know. And, somehow I doubt that Kennedy knew it when he made his famous challenge (although I allow that it could be possible that someone at NASA knew it and word reached Kennedy).
Slashdot Mirror
*I* could have told them it didn't save energy. I felt much more tired after the time change. :-P
No, it did not become a series because...the movie sucked.
IBM did nothing more than sell Germany the same census equipment that they sold the rest of the world, most of it before the Nazis came to power. It was how the Nazis used it that was evil, not that the equipment existed in the first place or that it was IBM who had sold it.
Because information is power.
And, they want to keep a record on you, which they will update with information they buy from other companies, in order to market to you for the rest of your natural life. (And probably beyond that, even.)
A report published by Timbro claims that most U.S. states individually have a higher GDP than most European states.
Somewhere I've seen a report that says the average poor family in the U.S. is better off than the average middle-class family in Sweden, but I can't find that one right now. The Wall St. Journal's Opinion Journal site does refer to this in an article, though: "[T]he percentage of Americans living below the poverty line has dropped to 12% from 22% since 1959. In 1999, 25% of American households were considered 'low income,' meaning they had an annual income of less than $25,000. If Sweden--the very model of a modern welfare state--were judged by the same standard, about 40% of its households would be considered low-income."
Boy, won't those NSA agents be surprised when they find out that those "half-naked 15 year old girls" are FBI agents!
Cul is also the slang French word for "ass."
So...rediculous could also mean: "your ass is worth doing twice again."
I'll be in the other room until everyone has finished with your ass. I really don't need to see it.
In every state in the U.S., you can go to court and file a civil case against the miscreant (generally filed against "John Doe" since you don't know who it is yet), presumably for credit card fraud, then have the court issue a subpoena to the ISP. Once you have the info back from the ISP, you can either continue the civil case yourself or see if the local district attorney is interested.
Silly poster! The universe is, in fact, shaped like a doughnut. Just ask Homer & Stephen (Hawking).
I've been using BitDefender (by SoftWin) for a little while, and while AVG and avast! are good, I like BitDefender better. It's more user-configurable, and I think the interface is less obnoxious. I haven't yet had it fail to detect a virus that makes it through my ISP's e-mail filters.
The problems is that BG uses it when they shouldn't. Occasional use of the technique is fine, and I agree that it can add to the atmosphere of a scene. but BG uses it all the freakin' time! I once tried to time how many minutes of show time in one particular episode they did this, but had to give up when I counted more than 10 minutes.
It also is a useful way to focus on a given character or situation,
I disagree. The way BG uses the technique, I can't focus on the scene at all.
Why am I the only one who can't stand this? Do you guys actually like it?
No to both. I pretty much gave up on the show just before the end of the first season, and the horrendously annoying camera work was at the top of my list of reasons. I can't watch something that I can't see.
Yeah, I said list of reasons. I haven't watched an episode since I gave up on it, and nothing I've read anywhere has induced me to even try any more episodes.
If it wasn't sufficient inducement that a state would be shooting itself in the foot by assuring it was under-represented in the Senate, I don't see how blocking state elections is going to help.
Except that this is precisely what happened over and over again. Sometimes state legislatures were unable to elect a senator for years at a time. And, since most politicians live just to get reelected, by threatening them with the loss of their job might be just the incentive needed to help them reach a consensus.I also don't think it a good idea to allow the Federal Government more power over state elections....
You have it backwards--repealing the 17th amendment would give state governments more power over federal elections.Besides, what this is essentially doing is locking the current legislators into their jobs. This is supposed to prod them how?
If you're referring to the idea of repealing the 17th amendment, that would block them from their jobs, not lock them in.The disadvantages of a popularly elected Senate are so manifest that it ought to be relatively easy to repeal the 17th, but for the fact it would be "less democratic".
Yeah, that's the speed bump in the idea. I don't really agree with it, though, since "we the people" will still be fully represented in the House.Precicely why I favor repeal of the 17th amendment.
(Of course, there would probably need to be an extra provision to prevent the problems of the past, where each house in bicameral state legislatures was held by opposing parties, and they couldn't agree on a senator. This would be simple, though. Include a provision in which, if a senator wasn't chosen by election day, no member of the state legislature could be reelected.)
the point of the Senate was an unelected body that was separated from politics. (Which is why certain types of decisions pass through the Senate--such as the approval of judge appointments.)
Partially correct. The other part is that, as a union of states, part of the federal legislature needed to represent the interests of the state legislatures, and that was the job of the Senate.
In with all of the kneejerk babble throughout this thread, there are some decent points, among which are that, for all our flaws, the U.S. still provides the best protection for freedom of speech in the world.
I think this episode provides a prime example of why main control of the root servers should remain with the U.S. Imagine what Canadian (or German or French) courts might consider doing if the Internet root servers were under their jurisdiction.
Speech is only free if you can say it *despite* whether or not it offends someone else. Canada has shown that she will pick and choose what type of speech is permitted by the government, the very antithesis of the concept of "free speech." Note that nothing in "free speech" obligates anyone else to listen to you.
But then he might be subjected to ridicule by any female coworkers who see this.
Then again, maybe he already is, and a cadaver's "stiff little finger" would be an improvement for him....
amusing aside: protestors were shouting through bullhorns denouncing Bush's '08 campaign in Berkeley a few months back
Well, I'm not surprised. People at Berkeley will protest anyone (or anything) to the right of Pol Pot.
Atlanta has a rail and subway system, Marta, but it doesn't really blanket the city all that well. I have a friend who lives down there and it's a 20 minute drive to work, even in the thick traffic, and 45 minute train ride with two transfers.
I live in one of the Atlanta suburbs, and have had occasion to take MARTA trains from time to time. I'm not impressed in the slightest. One of the running jokes about the MARTA trains is that they go from where nobody lives to where nobody works.
Even if it were possible for me to take a MARTA train to work, I doubt I would, for personal and political reasons.
What about it?
PGP/GPG are far more flexible than S/MIME.
Just to confirm, GPG 1.4 DOES support the more-bits versions of SHA. Run GPG with the --version parameter to get something like this for your copy:
IIRC, GPG already allows SHA-256 and SHA-512, but doesn't default to them.
There's a discussion about this very subject going on on the IMC's discussion list for OpenPGP. From reading the posts, particularly the ones by PGP's Jon Callas, I don't think that PGP has officially decided to implement this change just yet. (On the list, the thread titled "SHA-1 broken" is the one you will want to follow.)
But then, I could have missed something.
No, it really is made of green cheese.
You can see the expiration date inside one of the craters in this photo: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap020401.html/
after Apollo 11, the news backed off. It spiked again with the problems on 13, but after that there was little coverage of the following flights
Yeah, they played that up in the movie Apollo 13. Also, Apollo 17 astronaut Gene Cernan talks about it some in his book "The Last Man on the Moon."
I can't find the links now, but in the past I've read several articles which mention the mechanics of an Earth-Moon shot. Those article mention that, due to the orbit of the moon and the rotation of the Earth, 1969 was one of the optimal years for carrying the most payload to the moon with the least amount of fuel, and (IIRC) this optimal timeframe is on roughly a 30-year cycle.
Whether or not the Apollo program engineers knew this at the time, I do not know. And, somehow I doubt that Kennedy knew it when he made his famous challenge (although I allow that it could be possible that someone at NASA knew it and word reached Kennedy).