No, Joe the plumber put himself under intense investigation by being a McCain surrogate who was invited in to generate buzz and give many impromptu interviews in which he openly lies about himself. The fact was, Joe the Plumber was not anything he claimed to be, and for a guy who's so concerned about the future of the country, perhaps he should have paid his taxes like the rest of us.
Don't blame Obama for Joe the Plumber. He screwed himself the moment he hung up on a Phoenix, AZ Fox News affiliate reporter who started asking about his background to include his relationship with Charles Keating.
Actually, I believe domestic wiretapping under Clinton was still more expansive than under Bush 43. But then, we don't really know the full extent of domestic spying during the Bush 43 years yet. It'll be a few years before we have a true idea.
You saw Liberals and socialists? Where? I looked hard. I didn't see any Liberals. I thought I spotted some socialists disguised as Republicans telling us that the State should have a stake in the banks and mortgage companies. But I didn't see any Liberals. I did see Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, and others wax liberal and then march in lock step alongside neocons dressed like Republicans though.
Agreed. I haven't seen any real conservatives in a long time, and by that I mean political conservatives, not social conservatives.
I agree. Visually, they were frightening as opposed to just merely alarming. They moved quickly and spastically, and of course the sound of that chainsaw really resonates with me, being of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre generation.
Haha! I'm talking about Yngwie in his prime, not Yngwie today. Haven't seen him perform in years, but I hear it's not quite as good as during those classic years. My hearing's still pretty good, just a little pain, but that's enough to warrant being proactive in protecting my hearing.
On the upside, they don't make bands like Judas Priest, Loudness, or Racer X anymore; I don't find myself wanting to turn the knob to 11 on the bands today, so maybe I'll hold on to my hearing another ten years.:D
You know what, take your AC/DC and shove it. *wink* Try being front row at an Yngwie Malmsteen concert. Nothing but high frequency fills coming off those Marshall stacks. At least Angus had the decency to give us some bassy growls in his solos so we don't think our heads are going to explode like in that movie Scanners!
But yeah, I cringe at those "what about the children?" responses. My answer is that kids need to buy better head phones. I would say higher resolution playback both in the DAC and in the head gear combined with higher quality encoding (FLAC, Monkey's Audio, Apple Lossless, even Lame -fast -extreme) will make kids want to turn down their volume. I grew up listening to records on some gear with head phones, and it wasn't until I started using Disc-Man and Walk-Man and now iPod that I've started to have a bad reaction. I need a cigarette!
I agree completely. I use high end headgear, a combination of Etymotics, Grados, and V-Modas, depending on mood. Most consumers fail to realize that not all headphones are alike. I think many use high volume as a way to simulate a wider, more lush, soundstage. Loud volume does do a great job of faking it on cheap ear buds like Skull Candy. I'm already reaching the point where I feel pain at certain frequencies when maxing out my volume, so suddenly those $150+ head phones don't seem quite as materialistically pricey as they used to.
It might not be fair to infer he's using fearmongering. If he were, he would have surely told you how Palin will magically make things better by winking her eye and shooting a moose.
We have to put these economic models into perspective. They were valid in their time given then existing conditions. In the '80s, Reaganomics worked, and I loved it. I don't think it would work today. There are different issues today. McCain is arguing for Reaganomics at a most inappropriate time while being simultaneously forced to take a more Socialist position because of facts even he cannot deny. Obama is arguing for something that is different from Clintonian model, which itself owes a lot to a very fiscally conservative and begrudged Republican Congress.
I believe both candidates will ultimately come to the same conclusion while taking different paths to get there, and we'll end up seeing a more Socialist model at work. It's just that McCain will try to find ways to call it Reagan II, and Obama will try to call it Clinton II, but it won't be either.
Election year disclaimer: I'd like to see Obama win over that lunatic, but I think the best we can hope for from Obama is that he stops the bleeding.
Congress wants us to believe this is the fault of CEOs acting on their golden parachutes, lenders want us to believe they were forced at gunpoint by the law to give out bad loans, CNN wants us to believe it's the Mexicans and the poor. Fox wants us to believe it was Barney Frank and the Democrats. It doesn't surprise me that there are anti-intellectual luddites somewhere out there that would like to use this event as a passion play for the immortality of studying "sciencey" things, but most people will correctly realize fast that quants generated the formulae their bosses needed in order to paint mortgage backed securities in the best light possible in order to make them marketable. Moodys still bears responsibility for rating these instruments as investment-worthy.
You are forgetting about the role credit default swaps had in this. Had swaps not been unregulated, they would have been called insurance, and so investors attempting to mitigate the risks in their mortgage securities investments would have had some cover.
I have a very loose belief system because I'm constantly reevaluating what I believe to be true, as you encourage. And I am aware that there are Creationists who believe that the earth is billions of years old.
However, when we talk about Creationism viz-a-vis Evolution, we are generally talking about a single Creationist philosophy which frankly lacks real philosophical or academic merit. I'm talking of course about Creationism as espoused by politicians and pundits when they say, "man didn't come from monkeys".
This is the Creationism of that says man was made in about a week as is, that the world is approx 6,000 years old, that the dinosaurs weren't real, etc.
Obviously there are crossover belief systems: Creationists who believe the earth is billions of years old or who believe god only created the initial spark of life that lead ultimately to the creation of man.
Is anyone absolutely sure Flat Earthers are real today? I have no doubt there are some religiously motivated zealots out there who embrace FE theory, but for all we know, the Flat Earth Society as it exists today might be a truly awesome experiment in Discordian satire, a work of some fine subgeniuses.
You can disprove creationism, and you can do it rather easily. Creationism doesn't stop with "God created man". That's the domain of the mouth-breathing religious zealot who knows nothing about the scary world around him, including the history of the Bible. Real Creationism "theory" has become far more developed as Creationists try to respond to challenges.
There are quantitative observations the deeper you go into the theory. Calculations of such things as the age of the earth based on the summation of ages of the apostles are used as prima facie evidence that God created man, and yet carbon dating in this example easily shows the calculations are wrong.
apt-get? So I take it Ubuntu is based on Debian. In that case, it should be equal to any other Debian based distro. I would have thought there was much more. Looking at the Ubunto site though, it seems they made custom environments for various demographics (young children, etc.), so that's an innovation.
Speaking for the uninitiated, what is so special about Ubuntu that would make it any better a Linux than SuSe, Red Hat, or Slackware? Does Ubuntu contain exclusive software that makes Linux better?
Right, and so our next Rosetta Stone would likely need to be edited or remade in order to list languages what would be sufficiently available for future linguists. Hell, for all we know, in 10,000 years it will Planet of the Apes, and we few humans - in whatever form we exist, will now be totally telepathic.
I wasn't aware that WinZip was owned by a major software firm now. That's especially frightening. I remember how often I found evaluation copies of WinZip on university computers.
I'm not an expert on breeder reactors, but I imagine that if they are the best alternative, stigma keeps people from buying nuclear waste. There are still Americans who literally believe the earth is flat, that astronomy is a fraud, that evolution is a lie. I think getting even fairly rational people to accept that buying nuclear waste isn't bad will take some time.
Following your Rosetta Stone comment, the best we could do is to create a similar object which is written in every known language thought most likely to survive in some form 10,000 years from now. We then need to write that text in such a way that it won't be be worn away by exposure to the climate. We should *NOT* rely some digital transcription as 10,000 years is a long time to expect that any computer which might exist then would understand our archaic bits. An analog recording would be good, but again, we have to worry about rot. And whatever complex way we go about doing this, we would definitely need to use simple pictures depicting people dying in the event all our language options failed. We cannot assume that 10,000 years from now, the sentient life that exists will be high-tech.
All indications are that English will have the best survivability of all languages. But English 10,000 years from now will be completely unlike what we know it to be total. Wired recently had an article about "Chinglish", a variation of English as spoken throughout Asia which incorporates the stylistic linguistic differences of those Asian speakers' native languages. For example, I knew many Malaysians who would add "-lah" to end of sentences spoken in English. In university environments, many Chinese speakers adopted this style in their own spoken form of English. In Cyberpunk fiction, it was believe that the English language would be peppered with bits of African languages and Japanese. Then there is the hip-hop influence dialect of English now spoken as mainstream... even on local news at times. So, we might need to include certain unofficial dialects of English in our version of the Rosetta Stone.
You're suggesting that, even with the original media in your hands, the BSA would then accuse you of having pirated that software? I think even the BSA couldn't make that argument providing you have the official media... cause otherwise, they'd have to accuse you of illegally pressing perfect duplicate copies of your software, and that would be craaaaaaazzzzyyy!
You painted a total nightmare scenario in your hypothetical. Imagine if RIAA, MPAA, and BSA were to form a single cartel, pool their resources, and use their authority over local law enforcement (which they've blackmailed) to conduct such raids of your home.
I believe the parent was referring to the BSA's ability to get the government to come in on its behalf to seize equipment and software and generally intimate you. RIAA, to my knowledge, still relies on using lawyers who, like stormtroopers, can't hit the broadside of a space ship.
You forget to mention that the Install step can be divided into two phases: partitioning/formatting and actual installation of binaries. Formatting adds a lot of time to the total installation time.
But in defense of Windows (and Mac OS X by extension), do most Linux users rely on the applications included with their distros? I came from the diskette and CD-ROM based distro days, so whenever I installed a fresh distro, I always went minimal, THEN went online to download a better browser, a better GUI environment, word processor, and other apps I wanted. For me, it was no different from installing Windows. The upside was, I always had the current version of the application rather than whatever the last current version was before mastering the distro.
It's interesting claim that the government stole the money. As I read it, the government didn't like that LD supporters were pushing that currency as being legal tender. But supposedly in the past, the government didn't have a problem with it. IF the money isn't legal tender, the government stole nothing but monopoly money. But if it IS legal tender, then the government just went and robbed a bunch of people. The funny thing is, there are other alternative currencies in the US, but they haven't been targeted to my knowledge.
Fair enough. I was just curious whether Ron Paul's past support for the Liberty Dollar was an echo of the official party platform, or just a personal belief. And to be fair, I don't know that Ron Paul currently supports the Liberty Dollar. Last I heard, the feds did a raid on the mint that's been making them, and declared the money was illegal.
Slashdot Mirror
No, Joe the plumber put himself under intense investigation by being a McCain surrogate who was invited in to generate buzz and give many impromptu interviews in which he openly lies about himself. The fact was, Joe the Plumber was not anything he claimed to be, and for a guy who's so concerned about the future of the country, perhaps he should have paid his taxes like the rest of us.
Don't blame Obama for Joe the Plumber. He screwed himself the moment he hung up on a Phoenix, AZ Fox News affiliate reporter who started asking about his background to include his relationship with Charles Keating.
Actually, I believe domestic wiretapping under Clinton was still more expansive than under Bush 43. But then, we don't really know the full extent of domestic spying during the Bush 43 years yet. It'll be a few years before we have a true idea.
You saw Liberals and socialists? Where? I looked hard. I didn't see any Liberals. I thought I spotted some socialists disguised as Republicans telling us that the State should have a stake in the banks and mortgage companies. But I didn't see any Liberals. I did see Obama, Clinton, Pelosi, and others wax liberal and then march in lock step alongside neocons dressed like Republicans though.
Agreed. I haven't seen any real conservatives in a long time, and by that I mean political conservatives, not social conservatives.
I agree. Visually, they were frightening as opposed to just merely alarming. They moved quickly and spastically, and of course the sound of that chainsaw really resonates with me, being of the Texas Chainsaw Massacre generation.
Haha! I'm talking about Yngwie in his prime, not Yngwie today. Haven't seen him perform in years, but I hear it's not quite as good as during those classic years. My hearing's still pretty good, just a little pain, but that's enough to warrant being proactive in protecting my hearing.
On the upside, they don't make bands like Judas Priest, Loudness, or Racer X anymore; I don't find myself wanting to turn the knob to 11 on the bands today, so maybe I'll hold on to my hearing another ten years. :D
You know what, take your AC/DC and shove it. *wink* Try being front row at an Yngwie Malmsteen concert. Nothing but high frequency fills coming off those Marshall stacks. At least Angus had the decency to give us some bassy growls in his solos so we don't think our heads are going to explode like in that movie Scanners!
But yeah, I cringe at those "what about the children?" responses. My answer is that kids need to buy better head phones. I would say higher resolution playback both in the DAC and in the head gear combined with higher quality encoding (FLAC, Monkey's Audio, Apple Lossless, even Lame -fast -extreme) will make kids want to turn down their volume. I grew up listening to records on some gear with head phones, and it wasn't until I started using Disc-Man and Walk-Man and now iPod that I've started to have a bad reaction. I need a cigarette!
I agree completely. I use high end headgear, a combination of Etymotics, Grados, and V-Modas, depending on mood. Most consumers fail to realize that not all headphones are alike. I think many use high volume as a way to simulate a wider, more lush, soundstage. Loud volume does do a great job of faking it on cheap ear buds like Skull Candy. I'm already reaching the point where I feel pain at certain frequencies when maxing out my volume, so suddenly those $150+ head phones don't seem quite as materialistically pricey as they used to.
It might not be fair to infer he's using fearmongering. If he were, he would have surely told you how Palin will magically make things better by winking her eye and shooting a moose.
We have to put these economic models into perspective. They were valid in their time given then existing conditions. In the '80s, Reaganomics worked, and I loved it. I don't think it would work today. There are different issues today. McCain is arguing for Reaganomics at a most inappropriate time while being simultaneously forced to take a more Socialist position because of facts even he cannot deny. Obama is arguing for something that is different from Clintonian model, which itself owes a lot to a very fiscally conservative and begrudged Republican Congress.
I believe both candidates will ultimately come to the same conclusion while taking different paths to get there, and we'll end up seeing a more Socialist model at work. It's just that McCain will try to find ways to call it Reagan II, and Obama will try to call it Clinton II, but it won't be either.
Election year disclaimer: I'd like to see Obama win over that lunatic, but I think the best we can hope for from Obama is that he stops the bleeding.
Congress wants us to believe this is the fault of CEOs acting on their golden parachutes, lenders want us to believe they were forced at gunpoint by the law to give out bad loans, CNN wants us to believe it's the Mexicans and the poor. Fox wants us to believe it was Barney Frank and the Democrats. It doesn't surprise me that there are anti-intellectual luddites somewhere out there that would like to use this event as a passion play for the immortality of studying "sciencey" things, but most people will correctly realize fast that quants generated the formulae their bosses needed in order to paint mortgage backed securities in the best light possible in order to make them marketable. Moodys still bears responsibility for rating these instruments as investment-worthy.
You are forgetting about the role credit default swaps had in this. Had swaps not been unregulated, they would have been called insurance, and so investors attempting to mitigate the risks in their mortgage securities investments would have had some cover.
I doubt Nintendo is confusing anything. I think it's more the writer of the original article confusing "banning" and "hobbies" with something else.
I have a very loose belief system because I'm constantly reevaluating what I believe to be true, as you encourage. And I am aware that there are Creationists who believe that the earth is billions of years old.
However, when we talk about Creationism viz-a-vis Evolution, we are generally talking about a single Creationist philosophy which frankly lacks real philosophical or academic merit. I'm talking of course about Creationism as espoused by politicians and pundits when they say, "man didn't come from monkeys".
This is the Creationism of that says man was made in about a week as is, that the world is approx 6,000 years old, that the dinosaurs weren't real, etc.
Obviously there are crossover belief systems: Creationists who believe the earth is billions of years old or who believe god only created the initial spark of life that lead ultimately to the creation of man.
Is anyone absolutely sure Flat Earthers are real today? I have no doubt there are some religiously motivated zealots out there who embrace FE theory, but for all we know, the Flat Earth Society as it exists today might be a truly awesome experiment in Discordian satire, a work of some fine subgeniuses.
You can disprove creationism, and you can do it rather easily. Creationism doesn't stop with "God created man". That's the domain of the mouth-breathing religious zealot who knows nothing about the scary world around him, including the history of the Bible. Real Creationism "theory" has become far more developed as Creationists try to respond to challenges.
There are quantitative observations the deeper you go into the theory. Calculations of such things as the age of the earth based on the summation of ages of the apostles are used as prima facie evidence that God created man, and yet carbon dating in this example easily shows the calculations are wrong.
apt-get? So I take it Ubuntu is based on Debian. In that case, it should be equal to any other Debian based distro. I would have thought there was much more. Looking at the Ubunto site though, it seems they made custom environments for various demographics (young children, etc.), so that's an innovation.
Speaking for the uninitiated, what is so special about Ubuntu that would make it any better a Linux than SuSe, Red Hat, or Slackware? Does Ubuntu contain exclusive software that makes Linux better?
Right, and so our next Rosetta Stone would likely need to be edited or remade in order to list languages what would be sufficiently available for future linguists. Hell, for all we know, in 10,000 years it will Planet of the Apes, and we few humans - in whatever form we exist, will now be totally telepathic.
I wasn't aware that WinZip was owned by a major software firm now. That's especially frightening. I remember how often I found evaluation copies of WinZip on university computers.
I'm not an expert on breeder reactors, but I imagine that if they are the best alternative, stigma keeps people from buying nuclear waste. There are still Americans who literally believe the earth is flat, that astronomy is a fraud, that evolution is a lie. I think getting even fairly rational people to accept that buying nuclear waste isn't bad will take some time.
Following your Rosetta Stone comment, the best we could do is to create a similar object which is written in every known language thought most likely to survive in some form 10,000 years from now. We then need to write that text in such a way that it won't be be worn away by exposure to the climate. We should *NOT* rely some digital transcription as 10,000 years is a long time to expect that any computer which might exist then would understand our archaic bits. An analog recording would be good, but again, we have to worry about rot. And whatever complex way we go about doing this, we would definitely need to use simple pictures depicting people dying in the event all our language options failed. We cannot assume that 10,000 years from now, the sentient life that exists will be high-tech.
All indications are that English will have the best survivability of all languages. But English 10,000 years from now will be completely unlike what we know it to be total. Wired recently had an article about "Chinglish", a variation of English as spoken throughout Asia which incorporates the stylistic linguistic differences of those Asian speakers' native languages. For example, I knew many Malaysians who would add "-lah" to end of sentences spoken in English. In university environments, many Chinese speakers adopted this style in their own spoken form of English. In Cyberpunk fiction, it was believe that the English language would be peppered with bits of African languages and Japanese. Then there is the hip-hop influence dialect of English now spoken as mainstream... even on local news at times. So, we might need to include certain unofficial dialects of English in our version of the Rosetta Stone.
You're suggesting that, even with the original media in your hands, the BSA would then accuse you of having pirated that software? I think even the BSA couldn't make that argument providing you have the official media... cause otherwise, they'd have to accuse you of illegally pressing perfect duplicate copies of your software, and that would be craaaaaaazzzzyyy!
You painted a total nightmare scenario in your hypothetical. Imagine if RIAA, MPAA, and BSA were to form a single cartel, pool their resources, and use their authority over local law enforcement (which they've blackmailed) to conduct such raids of your home.
I believe the parent was referring to the BSA's ability to get the government to come in on its behalf to seize equipment and software and generally intimate you. RIAA, to my knowledge, still relies on using lawyers who, like stormtroopers, can't hit the broadside of a space ship.
You forget to mention that the Install step can be divided into two phases: partitioning/formatting and actual installation of binaries. Formatting adds a lot of time to the total installation time.
But in defense of Windows (and Mac OS X by extension), do most Linux users rely on the applications included with their distros? I came from the diskette and CD-ROM based distro days, so whenever I installed a fresh distro, I always went minimal, THEN went online to download a better browser, a better GUI environment, word processor, and other apps I wanted. For me, it was no different from installing Windows. The upside was, I always had the current version of the application rather than whatever the last current version was before mastering the distro.
It's interesting claim that the government stole the money. As I read it, the government didn't like that LD supporters were pushing that currency as being legal tender. But supposedly in the past, the government didn't have a problem with it. IF the money isn't legal tender, the government stole nothing but monopoly money. But if it IS legal tender, then the government just went and robbed a bunch of people. The funny thing is, there are other alternative currencies in the US, but they haven't been targeted to my knowledge.
Fair enough. I was just curious whether Ron Paul's past support for the Liberty Dollar was an echo of the official party platform, or just a personal belief. And to be fair, I don't know that Ron Paul currently supports the Liberty Dollar. Last I heard, the feds did a raid on the mint that's been making them, and declared the money was illegal.