Nobody doesn't like the idea of a Union. That is a collective will of the workers enforced through the collective actions of the workers. The PROBLEM is the debauchery we have now with how Unions are run. Now instead of a Union being workers who organize, Unions already exist and then try to force people to join. Joining should always be voluntary and not a condition of getting a job. Next, no money should EVER be TAKEN from the workers to run the Union. Instead this is standard practice. Thirdly, Unions contribute money to political parties that they TAKE (Steal) from the workers. If none of these things happened then all workers would LOVE Unions.
Yes, but if a person is such a douchebag as to spam millions of people without remorse then obviously he cannot be rehabilitated. They should have gone for the Death Penalty or at least shot him to the moon.
No but I DO suggest that we go back to the old way of allowing divorce. That is get rid of the "Irreconcilable differences" clause and only allow divorce for abuse, infidelity and abandonment.
You are not understanding the problem AT ALL! So the court struck down the law? So what! I'm not taking issue with that per se. It's that the Status Quo was not to allow Gay Marriage which is what it should have gone back to but without a law disallowing it. INSTEAD somehow after the case was decided it somehow did NOT go back to the Status Quo and instead went to now ALLOWING GAY MARRIAGE. How Judges did this is beyond me. This is why I think that violence is called for. Who polices the judges? Who Judges the Judges? I guess God does right?
Wait wait wait. Different Constitution. One was the ACTUAL constitution and the other one was the state constitution in the case of Gay Marriage. More importantly sprinkle in some activist liberal judges and you have the most ridiculous injustice and disregard for the people of California in all of California's history. The PEOPLE voted the proposition into law. Gay Marriage was NOT allowed before. Even when the activist judges over-ruled the proposition that STILL would not have made it legal for Gay Marriage to happen. Some how the judicial branch THOUGHT it was the legislative branch and actual pushed Gay Marriage into existence. That a riot didn't break out at the court house still astounds me to this very day. It's not that I'm so against Gay Marriage that I want a lynching of these judges; it's that these judges are trying to make themselves all powerful that makes me want to string them up to a tree.
It doesn't work that way. DNS local servers are either run by a corporation or by your ISP. Either one could be hacked now. So it's not if the website is patched. It is if the DNS server your computer is using is patched.
The REASON why marriage is debated at all is because GOVERNMENT GOT INVOLVED IN IT. If it was just a ceremony then nobody would care. In fact even in states that disallow gay marriage you can have the ceremony. That part is not illegal. It is just that the GOVERNMENT will not recognize it. You are free to do what you want till and the Government endorses what is right.
Well quite frankly I'd like to co-locate all my servers in a data center and have them worry about power and fire protection and I worry about running the servers. The Internet just isn't fast enough yet though to do that when you need to write large amounts of data to the servers.
But you are for censorship so my point is valid because so was Hitler. Maybe I could have left out Hitler and just mentioned the censorship part but you know how people get caught up in arguments over the Internet and all.
Link? What kind of IBM servers? I like IBM but I've looked at their regular 1U servers and they don't seem much different from something I can buy from SuperMicro for way less.
HAHA. The ACLU that bastion of fairness that it is. NOT! They have a vendetta against religion in society. Look, I don't know why you can't understand the constitution but it says nothing about teaching. It says something about the establishment of laws regarding religion. Hence, there should be no laws regarding religion that prevent it's teaching. It's just basic understanding of the English Language. The fundamental flaw is how far liberal judges took the "Separation of Church and State" ideal that THEY MADE UP as opposed to gathering it from the actual constitution and then went on to say that now all people who are public servants are also prohibited from speaking about religion while they are working. It's not in the Constitution at all. It's been woven like some terrible web of deceit.
Second of all my school offered these classes as electives like they should be and did everything by the book. Just so you know the fundamental idea of ID was not around when I went to High School but the teleological argument was and I learned about that. I read parts of Dante's Inferno in high school and I learned about all the world's major religions in another class. It's amazing I know but I was actually given all the knowledge and then allowed to decide on my own. But you don't want that. You want censorship and banning of books. You are like Hitler in that respect.
Answer: Because the same being created them that way? All your evidence goes both ways. And yes ID is the act of arguing the point. It is not a statement of fact. It's the argument that maybe life came out of something which itself was already intelligent and ordered. Futhermore, the extension of Evolutionary Theory into speciation and origins (Which it doesn't lend itself to) is jut an argument about another idea of where we came from. MAYBE both belong in a PHILOSOPHY class.
Second of all you quoted "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" but you just ignore the last part. Congress cannot be the thought police and they can't dictate that religion cannot be taught about in public school. This restrains congress and makes it so the Government cannot sponsor a STATE RELIGION. It however does not put a GAG ORDER on teachers. Luckily my school (Which was public) didn't take your moronic interpretation of the Constitution and did have classes about Religion and all sorts of other things people like to get their panties in a twist about.
I'm sorry but what part of the first amendment are you talking about? The part that says we have a freedom of speech? Maybe the free press part? Just what are you talking about? I love when people reference the Bill of Rights and then don't even know what's in it.
Second of all most people don't have a problem with the idea of evolution as a general "fact that organisms change and adjust over generations to changing environments in accordance with survivability and reproduction". Really it's true. Even Evangelical Christians believe this is true. What astounds people is how far pseudo-scientific people then expand upon that and say that basically life came out of nothing and there was no order and then bang order and no being had anything to do with the order appearing out of disorder and it was all of natural consequence.
First off where to the laws of nature come from. For that matter where to the laws of logic and reasoning come from. Man didn't make them. They just discovered these already true principles. All ID is saying is that maybe species were designed to a point where they took the shape/form/arraignment of organs etc. of the creatures we now see walking the earth and swimming the oceans. That is all. I personally also have a hard time with speciation happening because of evolution. In other words entirely new species popping up just because of natural selection.
You crack me up. You just don't get it. If I don't have the time to do it I don't have the time to do it. If I work for a company of 60 people (45 of whom are sales staff) then the expectations are going to be lower across the board. The point is so much is expected of me to get done that is basically data entry and managing resources that system admin stuff is relegated to my free time and when things break. Just a little history there used to be another IT consultant who worked 2 days a week plus we had a contract with a consulting agency that did work on demand when we needed it with us guaranteeing so many hours a month. Now none of that exists and it's just me so get off your high horse and stop promoting that stereotype that all IT people are jerks.
Of course I realize the problems with not testing everything. I can fix outage quickly and it's not a big deal. I'm not advocating never testing things like updates. Don't say stupid shit like don't come work for you. I work in this environment now but if I worked for big IT dept. at some corporation then I would go by the book and do things right. I just do it this way because I can't do it any other way. My point was to show that most people were making lame assumptions about the environments people are working in.
You know what I can't leave it at that. You are a jackass and you are the kind of people my comment was pointed towards. You think that because you work for a company with "sky high IT budget" and "Unlimited IT Hiring policies" that everyone is in a similar situation. Well we are not and you can't take all that for granted and then sit back and whine and bitch and moan that people are not doing their jobs. The point is you don't know shit about specific situation and you can't know why something was or was not done. Stop arm-chair quarterbacking.
Besides I like it here. Here where I fly by the seat of my pants is where the shit gets done. I don't reference billions of policy guidelines when doing my job. I MAKE policy and I MAKE decisions in a timely fashion and I GET SHIT DONE way quicker then many enterprise level IT departments can. This is where life is real and fantasy worlds fly out the window.
No no no. I never said it was not a good practice to test updates. I think it is a great practice. The problem comes down to man hours because I'm the only IT person in the company and I have to do so much else besides sysadmin stuff. Everytime an employee starts it creates at least half an hour of work for me but probably more. We are mostly sales staff so people start all the time (and conversely are let go or leave all the time too).
So if a company has more then one IT person and that person is doing sysadmin stuff 90% of the time then they should test updates. If not then it can hardly be expected to happen. My point is these people talk like if you don't do it then you suck. Well no I don't suck; I just don't have time.
Slashdot Mirror
Nobody doesn't like the idea of a Union. That is a collective will of the workers enforced through the collective actions of the workers. The PROBLEM is the debauchery we have now with how Unions are run. Now instead of a Union being workers who organize, Unions already exist and then try to force people to join. Joining should always be voluntary and not a condition of getting a job. Next, no money should EVER be TAKEN from the workers to run the Union. Instead this is standard practice. Thirdly, Unions contribute money to political parties that they TAKE (Steal) from the workers. If none of these things happened then all workers would LOVE Unions.
Right. But then you get to steal a TANK! A Mother F'ing TANK! SUweeet!
Yes, but if a person is such a douchebag as to spam millions of people without remorse then obviously he cannot be rehabilitated. They should have gone for the Death Penalty or at least shot him to the moon.
No but I DO suggest that we go back to the old way of allowing divorce. That is get rid of the "Irreconcilable differences" clause and only allow divorce for abuse, infidelity and abandonment.
Nobody stopped anybody from marrying. All the law stopped is the State from recognizing it.
You are not understanding the problem AT ALL! So the court struck down the law? So what! I'm not taking issue with that per se. It's that the Status Quo was not to allow Gay Marriage which is what it should have gone back to but without a law disallowing it. INSTEAD somehow after the case was decided it somehow did NOT go back to the Status Quo and instead went to now ALLOWING GAY MARRIAGE. How Judges did this is beyond me. This is why I think that violence is called for. Who polices the judges? Who Judges the Judges? I guess God does right?
Wait wait wait. Different Constitution. One was the ACTUAL constitution and the other one was the state constitution in the case of Gay Marriage. More importantly sprinkle in some activist liberal judges and you have the most ridiculous injustice and disregard for the people of California in all of California's history. The PEOPLE voted the proposition into law. Gay Marriage was NOT allowed before. Even when the activist judges over-ruled the proposition that STILL would not have made it legal for Gay Marriage to happen. Some how the judicial branch THOUGHT it was the legislative branch and actual pushed Gay Marriage into existence. That a riot didn't break out at the court house still astounds me to this very day. It's not that I'm so against Gay Marriage that I want a lynching of these judges; it's that these judges are trying to make themselves all powerful that makes me want to string them up to a tree.
It doesn't work that way. DNS local servers are either run by a corporation or by your ISP. Either one could be hacked now. So it's not if the website is patched. It is if the DNS server your computer is using is patched.
The REASON why marriage is debated at all is because GOVERNMENT GOT INVOLVED IN IT. If it was just a ceremony then nobody would care. In fact even in states that disallow gay marriage you can have the ceremony. That part is not illegal. It is just that the GOVERNMENT will not recognize it. You are free to do what you want till and the Government endorses what is right.
Yo do know that gay marriages has a MUCH higher divorce rate then conventional marriages right?
Uhm no. The law saying we can have guns IS the constitution.
Well quite frankly I'd like to co-locate all my servers in a data center and have them worry about power and fire protection and I worry about running the servers. The Internet just isn't fast enough yet though to do that when you need to write large amounts of data to the servers.
But you are for censorship so my point is valid because so was Hitler. Maybe I could have left out Hitler and just mentioned the censorship part but you know how people get caught up in arguments over the Internet and all.
Link? What kind of IBM servers? I like IBM but I've looked at their regular 1U servers and they don't seem much different from something I can buy from SuperMicro for way less.
Godwin is not a violation; it is an inevitability.
HAHA. The ACLU that bastion of fairness that it is. NOT! They have a vendetta against religion in society. Look, I don't know why you can't understand the constitution but it says nothing about teaching. It says something about the establishment of laws regarding religion. Hence, there should be no laws regarding religion that prevent it's teaching. It's just basic understanding of the English Language. The fundamental flaw is how far liberal judges took the "Separation of Church and State" ideal that THEY MADE UP as opposed to gathering it from the actual constitution and then went on to say that now all people who are public servants are also prohibited from speaking about religion while they are working. It's not in the Constitution at all. It's been woven like some terrible web of deceit.
Second of all my school offered these classes as electives like they should be and did everything by the book. Just so you know the fundamental idea of ID was not around when I went to High School but the teleological argument was and I learned about that. I read parts of Dante's Inferno in high school and I learned about all the world's major religions in another class. It's amazing I know but I was actually given all the knowledge and then allowed to decide on my own. But you don't want that. You want censorship and banning of books. You are like Hitler in that respect.
Answer: Because the same being created them that way? All your evidence goes both ways. And yes ID is the act of arguing the point. It is not a statement of fact. It's the argument that maybe life came out of something which itself was already intelligent and ordered. Futhermore, the extension of Evolutionary Theory into speciation and origins (Which it doesn't lend itself to) is jut an argument about another idea of where we came from. MAYBE both belong in a PHILOSOPHY class.
Second of all you quoted "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof" but you just ignore the last part. Congress cannot be the thought police and they can't dictate that religion cannot be taught about in public school. This restrains congress and makes it so the Government cannot sponsor a STATE RELIGION. It however does not put a GAG ORDER on teachers. Luckily my school (Which was public) didn't take your moronic interpretation of the Constitution and did have classes about Religion and all sorts of other things people like to get their panties in a twist about.
I'm sorry but what part of the first amendment are you talking about? The part that says we have a freedom of speech? Maybe the free press part? Just what are you talking about? I love when people reference the Bill of Rights and then don't even know what's in it.
Second of all most people don't have a problem with the idea of evolution as a general "fact that organisms change and adjust over generations to changing environments in accordance with survivability and reproduction". Really it's true. Even Evangelical Christians believe this is true. What astounds people is how far pseudo-scientific people then expand upon that and say that basically life came out of nothing and there was no order and then bang order and no being had anything to do with the order appearing out of disorder and it was all of natural consequence.
First off where to the laws of nature come from. For that matter where to the laws of logic and reasoning come from. Man didn't make them. They just discovered these already true principles. All ID is saying is that maybe species were designed to a point where they took the shape/form/arraignment of organs etc. of the creatures we now see walking the earth and swimming the oceans. That is all. I personally also have a hard time with speciation happening because of evolution. In other words entirely new species popping up just because of natural selection.
First off you need to understand that Intelligent Design is just a re-phrasing of the Teleological Argument. Now for some statistics. http://www.raptureready.com/featured/funk/statistics-probability.html and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity just to start.
Actually NO IT IS NOT. It's free for PERSONAL USE ONLY. Read the EULA.
You crack me up. You just don't get it. If I don't have the time to do it I don't have the time to do it. If I work for a company of 60 people (45 of whom are sales staff) then the expectations are going to be lower across the board. The point is so much is expected of me to get done that is basically data entry and managing resources that system admin stuff is relegated to my free time and when things break. Just a little history there used to be another IT consultant who worked 2 days a week plus we had a contract with a consulting agency that did work on demand when we needed it with us guaranteeing so many hours a month. Now none of that exists and it's just me so get off your high horse and stop promoting that stereotype that all IT people are jerks.
Of course I realize the problems with not testing everything. I can fix outage quickly and it's not a big deal. I'm not advocating never testing things like updates. Don't say stupid shit like don't come work for you. I work in this environment now but if I worked for big IT dept. at some corporation then I would go by the book and do things right. I just do it this way because I can't do it any other way. My point was to show that most people were making lame assumptions about the environments people are working in.
You know what I can't leave it at that. You are a jackass and you are the kind of people my comment was pointed towards. You think that because you work for a company with "sky high IT budget" and "Unlimited IT Hiring policies" that everyone is in a similar situation. Well we are not and you can't take all that for granted and then sit back and whine and bitch and moan that people are not doing their jobs. The point is you don't know shit about specific situation and you can't know why something was or was not done. Stop arm-chair quarterbacking.
Besides I like it here. Here where I fly by the seat of my pants is where the shit gets done. I don't reference billions of policy guidelines when doing my job. I MAKE policy and I MAKE decisions in a timely fashion and I GET SHIT DONE way quicker then many enterprise level IT departments can. This is where life is real and fantasy worlds fly out the window.
Obviously you've never worked at a company that has roots selling mortgages. People fucking cuss all the time here.
No no no. I never said it was not a good practice to test updates. I think it is a great practice. The problem comes down to man hours because I'm the only IT person in the company and I have to do so much else besides sysadmin stuff. Everytime an employee starts it creates at least half an hour of work for me but probably more. We are mostly sales staff so people start all the time (and conversely are let go or leave all the time too).
So if a company has more then one IT person and that person is doing sysadmin stuff 90% of the time then they should test updates. If not then it can hardly be expected to happen. My point is these people talk like if you don't do it then you suck. Well no I don't suck; I just don't have time.