Many consumers like Apple products because they make it easy to buy and consume content without glitches, but the closed system that makes this possible locks customers and media and software providers into Apple's proprietary iTunes online store and iOS operating system. Some critics compare it to Microsoft in that regard.
Nobody asked the question, the reporter just made it up.
Humphrey, McGovern and Mondale proved that what you perceive as a true liberal were, and forever will be, unelectable. Carter would have been unelectable had Nixon not screwed the pooch and had he not been a Bible thumping Southerner getting support from the last vestiges of the Dixiecrats before they finally realized that the Democratic party failed completely to represent them. Your brand of liberal died forty years ago except in Minnesota and New England.
Also: The media may have dubbed Gary Hart "the Yuppie Candidate", but yuppies voted overwhelmingly Republican in 1984.
Hart called himself that, not the media. Show me a credible source that indicates that voting pattern. In spite of the fact that Reagan got 59% of the vote, in spite of the fact that Mondale was a big union supporter for which Yuppies have no natural affinity, you cannot because it is an outright lie. Yuppies were all over the place as to who they voted for in 1984. You are placing far more significance on that demographic than ever existed in real life because you are a bigot.
It amazes me that you, and an amazingly large number of Linux users, see an obvious shortcoming of Linux as a problem with Netflix, and other content providers. The pattern seems to be beating ones chest for being a Linux user, a criticism of other OS', a justification of piracy, advocation of local storage, a criticism of streaming in general, and a veiled attack on ISPs. I have one word for you: DENIAL.
If you were a Netflix executive reading the comments by Linux users here, would you not conclude that there is no reason to support Linux? You stated clearly that Netflix could not provide you with adequate service for four distinct reasons. Similar patterns exist in other areas where Linux is not supported and you guys wonder why.
If you were streaming to a Sony BD player, your problem may have with the Anonymous DDOS attack on Sony the other day. I could stream to my computer fine, but not to the BD player.
Hardware isn't the problem, you could build a hundred boxes and if you load them all with Linux, you won't accomplish anything. Or you can run a VM with Windows, IE and Silverlight like the FAQ of your HTPC software suggests.
As someone with a clear recollection of where he was when Kennedy was assassinated, I know the directions both of our dominant parties have moved since Goldwater and Johnson were the heads of their respective parties.
I was not taking issue with your characterization of Republicans, I was taking issue with your abuse of the term yuppie. Your use of the word is not consistent with history. Jerry Rubin was among the first tagged with the epithet in 1982. In 1984 Gary Hart (a Democrat) ran as the "Yuppie Candidate for President". In 1985 the Wall Street Journal described yuppies as, "a class of people who put off having families so they can make payments on the SAABs." The Republicans never embraced Jerry Rubin, Gary Hart or Saab drivers in the '80s.
My recollection on that situation was the Democrats claimed it was unfair to "incarcerate" the insane who were not dangerous to others, they got the ball rolling and Republicans saw this as a great cost savings opportunity. Congress, not Reagan was responsible. Both parties were more interested in talking points than serving the public interest. Like so many of the issues in this country, both parties have plausible deniability, but both are responsible.
Yuppies are, in my experience, overwhelmingly somewhat left of center. So "Yuppie Scum Capitalism" and Republicans is a bit of a non sequitur.
I suggest that, in the future,when you have difficulty answering the question "Why?", you look at the actions of both of the dominant parties.
Constitutional protections are not statistically based. They are guarantees to every citizen and person within the borders of the United States. A non-zero chance of the government infringing Constitutionally guaranteed rights is unacceptable - no tinfoil hat is required to recognize that either the government respects everyone's rights or it does not.
Passports are unlikely. A federal government issued ID not valid for travel in other countries is more likely. I would put money on such a measure being implemented under a Democratic President as an appeasement of Republican calls to protect our borders and control illegal immigration. Historically many actions come from the opposite party than is expected, e.g., Democrats were accused of being soft on communism, so it was a Republican that recognized Communist China.
Corporatism does not mean what you think it means. Control of corporations was to be wielded by the state, not the opposite as our two dominant political parties seem intent upon insuring.
Also, as a side note, the President does not directly (or even indirectly) control the FCC. Just because the President and the FCC are both in the executive branch doesn't mean the President can call the FCC up and tell them what to do. So Obama "going rogue" is a total non sequitur in this case, but thanks for playing.
How do you reconcile your statement against this from TFA:
During the 2008 campaign, Obama told CNET that "I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality."
Slashdot Mirror
Many consumers like Apple products because they make it easy to buy and consume content without glitches, but the closed system that makes this possible locks customers and media and software providers into Apple's proprietary iTunes online store and iOS operating system. Some critics compare it to Microsoft in that regard.
Nobody asked the question, the reporter just made it up.
Also: The media may have dubbed Gary Hart "the Yuppie Candidate", but yuppies voted overwhelmingly Republican in 1984.
Hart called himself that, not the media. Show me a credible source that indicates that voting pattern. In spite of the fact that Reagan got 59% of the vote, in spite of the fact that Mondale was a big union supporter for which Yuppies have no natural affinity, you cannot because it is an outright lie. Yuppies were all over the place as to who they voted for in 1984. You are placing far more significance on that demographic than ever existed in real life because you are a bigot.
It amazes me that you, and an amazingly large number of Linux users, see an obvious shortcoming of Linux as a problem with Netflix, and other content providers. The pattern seems to be beating ones chest for being a Linux user, a criticism of other OS', a justification of piracy, advocation of local storage, a criticism of streaming in general, and a veiled attack on ISPs. I have one word for you: DENIAL.
If you were a Netflix executive reading the comments by Linux users here, would you not conclude that there is no reason to support Linux? You stated clearly that Netflix could not provide you with adequate service for four distinct reasons. Similar patterns exist in other areas where Linux is not supported and you guys wonder why.
If you were streaming to a Sony BD player, your problem may have with the Anonymous DDOS attack on Sony the other day. I could stream to my computer fine, but not to the BD player.
Hardware isn't the problem, you could build a hundred boxes and if you load them all with Linux, you won't accomplish anything. Or you can run a VM with Windows, IE and Silverlight like the FAQ of your HTPC software suggests.
Last I heard VMs didn't require another box.
As someone with a clear recollection of where he was when Kennedy was assassinated, I know the directions both of our dominant parties have moved since Goldwater and Johnson were the heads of their respective parties.
I was not taking issue with your characterization of Republicans, I was taking issue with your abuse of the term yuppie. Your use of the word is not consistent with history. Jerry Rubin was among the first tagged with the epithet in 1982. In 1984 Gary Hart (a Democrat) ran as the "Yuppie Candidate for President". In 1985 the Wall Street Journal described yuppies as, "a class of people who put off having families so they can make payments on the SAABs." The Republicans never embraced Jerry Rubin, Gary Hart or Saab drivers in the '80s.
A toupée is not a wig, that is like comparing a tribble to a chinchilla.
Born-mean Loon
My recollection on that situation was the Democrats claimed it was unfair to "incarcerate" the insane who were not dangerous to others, they got the ball rolling and Republicans saw this as a great cost savings opportunity. Congress, not Reagan was responsible. Both parties were more interested in talking points than serving the public interest. Like so many of the issues in this country, both parties have plausible deniability, but both are responsible.
Yuppies are, in my experience, overwhelmingly somewhat left of center. So "Yuppie Scum Capitalism" and Republicans is a bit of a non sequitur.
I suggest that, in the future,when you have difficulty answering the question "Why?", you look at the actions of both of the dominant parties.
So you are saying the educational system failed him in being able to formulate a compelling argument?
Constitutional protections are not statistically based. They are guarantees to every citizen and person within the borders of the United States. A non-zero chance of the government infringing Constitutionally guaranteed rights is unacceptable - no tinfoil hat is required to recognize that either the government respects everyone's rights or it does not.
Passports are unlikely. A federal government issued ID not valid for travel in other countries is more likely. I would put money on such a measure being implemented under a Democratic President as an appeasement of Republican calls to protect our borders and control illegal immigration. Historically many actions come from the opposite party than is expected, e.g., Democrats were accused of being soft on communism, so it was a Republican that recognized Communist China.
Defunding airport security is far more rational. If we want to fund theater, Shakespeare wrote better scripts than those used by the TSA.
SGI is going to use up to 256 of these in a supercomputer, bring some weenies and marshmallows.
Oracle’s 11g database can run 10 times faster at encryption tasks using the E7 series chips. Lots more performance comparisons and the 19 companies names Bull, Cisco, Cray, Dawning, Dell, Fujitsu, HP, Hitachi, Huawei, IBM, Inspur, Lenovo, NEC, Oracle, PowerLeader, Quanta Computer, SGI, SuperMicro, and Unisys
Without one, determining whether software or hardware was being produced might be difficult.
The name begins with Truf
If the precedent applied to the US then Dick Wee, Dick Hade,and a lot of others can make some money from Google's "Did you mean" suggestions.
It is unlikely that Benito Mussolini made that statement.
Corporatism does not mean what you think it means. Control of corporations was to be wielded by the state, not the opposite as our two dominant political parties seem intent upon insuring.
Also, as a side note, the President does not directly (or even indirectly) control the FCC. Just because the President and the FCC are both in the executive branch doesn't mean the President can call the FCC up and tell them what to do. So Obama "going rogue" is a total non sequitur in this case, but thanks for playing.
How do you reconcile your statement against this from TFA:
During the 2008 campaign, Obama told CNET that "I will take a backseat to no one in my commitment to network neutrality."
Are you suggesting that Mr. Obama is a liar?
No, it is only 47%, but 40% strongly disapprove of his performance and only 24% strongly approve.
I venture to guess that if you dropped in the middle of Africa or Asia you would find grunting and pointing more useful than jotting a note.
The Linux guys have to layoff that shit. Windows and OS X users are allowed to use steel-toed boots for cause and effect respectively.
I don't think they seriously considered Peter Sunde's application for the position.
The Jews?
Last Sentence: ""First launch from our Cape Canaveral launch complex is planned for late 2013 or 2014,” Musk said."
Apparently their reporters have a very short attention span.