What they really need to do is reform welfare, unemployment, Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Those programs are money pits that soak up 60% (and increasing) of the fed budget, and are completely unauthorized by the Constitution.
ColdWetDog:
And just because the Constitution doesn't say something, it doesn't mean that we can or can't do it. It's not an operations manual. The founding fathers expected us to think for ourselves from time to time.
AC:
No, you are not telling the complete story. The Constitution is specific and meant to be taken as a whole. Do try and keep up.
The federal government cannot do these things constitutionally. Period.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
I took your advice at heart and found this in Article 1 and Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
I agree we need to reform and scale back these entitlements. However, the laws that created those entitlements were constitutional and arguing otherwise is pointless and wastes energy that would be better used in drafting a workable reform bill.
Yes and no - one of the reforms enacted in the past is that a sitting congress can only alter pay of future congresses, not their own. Presumably, this is designed to keep a sitting congress from voting themselves $1 billion or something similarly outrageous in salary.
This only affected how soon the congress people receive their pay raise. Look at the ridiculous incumbency rate despite of low approval ratings.
He didn't travel. So there's a shit load of savings right there.
I love the distortion too. No mention that it is part of the "In performance at the White House" program has been around since 1978 and airs on PBS and American Forces Network nor that "Corporate funding for this program is provided by Pepsi-Cola. Foundation support is provided by The Annenberg Foundation and the Anne Ray Charitable Trust. Major funding is also provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, PBS and public television viewers. Support programming like In Performance at The White House through your local PBS station."
But then we have to ask is it appropriate to force private enterprise to sell gay porn?
Yes that question was too sensational for the topic at hand since we are talking about one small image in a comic book filled with images. Also you'd think a book store would be able to handle a sale of adult oriented books to adults but despite all that, the question remains valid. Should a private company be forced to carry something that they themselves don't think is appropriate?
I think we all know the answer is no. Just like the author has the right to make that book, Apple has a right not to carry it. The only time this subject touches the "third rail" is when the government starts telling people what books can be written or sold.
The authors knew the risks when they included that image in Saga #2 and based on Apple's company policies I believe Apple is not homophobic. I think decisions like these keeps Apple in stores and bookstores that do restrict the types of media they sell to their customers (e.g. Walmart, christian bookstores, etc.).
How much extra recruiting is actually needed? They have TV shows like NCIS, NCIS:LA, and soon NCIS:Red Team. Not to mention movies like Zero Dark Thirty, Olympus has fallen, and G.I. Joe: Retaliation.
Given that BBT is basically geek blackface, and loathed by most that I know
Geek blackface? WTF?
Quit trying to be a hipster and enjoy the show. I work in a similar environment where the show takes place and sometimes it is spot on. Working relationships between scientists and engineers, scientists competing for tenure while remaining friends, Theoretical physicists views toward Applied physicists, and personality quirks.
My colleagues and I love it when it cuts close to home but so over the top that it's funny when discussed around the water cooler.
Not quite the same. You are free to pick up a different newspaper at any time with very little effort or time.
Operating systems are a totally different matter. Unlike newspapers, you become more committed to the OS with each application you purchase that runs on that OS.
Not saying anything about the merits of the complaint, but the argument is that Google is giving away an OS in order to gain share of the smart phone market. Google doesn't make its revenue directly through from OS sales, instead it relies on advertising revenue which it unfairly gains by providing an OS for free that gives Google preferred status in searches and ad revenue. Microsoft knows this because they have used similar methods in the past.
I'm indifferent since a similar complaint was used against Microsoft's giving away IE for free in order to use the legal system to gain market share. Live by the courts - die by the courts.
The leftists will spew hate and dance on her grave. The right will honor her free market initiatives. The ones in the middle are caught in the crossfire. One of her quotes "“Standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous; you get knocked down by the traffic from both sides.” seems appropriate and sheds light on her political philosophy.
As an American, I can only say that she was well liked by us (at least our media). Not because of any economic policies but because it was the 80s and the brinkmanship with the Soviet Union was the #1 issue on both sides of the "pond". Reagan and Thatcher could pretty much do anything they wanted because we were more concerned about the cold war than anything else. The threat of nuclear war dominated our popular culture and the fall of the Soviet Union cemented Reagan's and Thatcher's place as the ones who made it possible to no longer have to worry about the threat of nuclear war.
As an outsider, it isn't fair for me to comment on her domestic policy. For the US, the 80's seemed decadent for the upwardly mobile segment of the population while the middle class waited for the benefits to trickle down as their economic security was threatened or eliminated. I'm assume the UK experience was similar with the upwardly mobile taking advantage of the deregulated markets and the middle class feeling the pressure from the lack of job security or outright job loss. The 80's was a conflicted time for the working class.
Anyway however how right or wrong her policies were, the number one reason why she was ultimately good for Great Britain was her stubbornness. The status quo wasn't a real option for Great Britain and it took her to put their government in a gear other than neutral. I think in the end history will note that it was her disruption of the status quo that was beneficial for her country and not necessarily her policies. Same can probably be said of Reagan in the US. Our economic system needed to be a little less regulated or government owned. Of course there is a huge difference from lessening government control/ownership and outright privatize everything and allow the market self regulate. Anyway back on topic...
My mild fondness for both Reagan and Thatcher is dampened by the reality that despite ultimately improving the GDP and political stature of both nations as well as eliminated the soviet threat, both countries now suffer from a society divided by the so called free market. I don't think it's really fair to place the blame entirely on the free market. Regardless, the short-term gains are now giving way to the long-term consequences.
I guess a self-conflicted comment is appropriate for the current subject...
Re:Congratulations R Team
on
R 3.0.0 Released
·
· Score: 5, Insightful
Tell that to all the "scientists" and "researchers" paying money for _and_ investing lifetimes worth of effort into writing libraries for Matlab, Maple, Mathematica, LabView and other proprietary environments, instead of contributing to make the existing free environments better.
Times are changing. There are many forces at work here:
1. Cutbacks in funding is making lead scientists look for ways to save money.
2. The proprietary vendors upgrading their software and charging license fees for each version (one particular vendor licenses specific minor versions).
3. The desire to share work and non-proprietary methods are the best way to do it.
4. New postdocs are familiar with python (they like working in iPython in particular) and its libraries.
5. R is gaining ground with the older scientists due to its features and price.
Most of the new WiFi routers offer guest networks. Set one up and tell them to bring their own device. With the number of people with smartphones, I don't really see a legitimate need to set up guest computers.
You should be. We worked hard making components smaller, CPUs more energy efficient, touch screens more reliable, operating systems better suited for mobile environments, improved battery power density, created wireless protocols to support higher data rates, and constructed enough radio towers to support all this.
I don't see any such language in the document that was linked within the article. All I see are laws against trafficking in passwords, unauthorized access to a computer system to obtain financial information, non-public information from any government agency, or damage critical infrastructure computers.
Using it on anything else is asking for trouble, because if you lose your connection, you lose your app. Perhaps an improvement can be made to X11 forwarding in the new path forward (wayland) to make it more like screen where you can attach and detach to a running X11 app from a networked endpoint.
I used NX for X11 over VPN. It works very well and I am able to resume where I left off if my VPN connection drops or I want to let something run overnight but don't want to remain online. NoMachine closed source their server at version 4.0, but FreeNX and Neatx took its place.
Before cell phones were cheap and everywhere, we had a large community of HAM operators who used our local 2m repeater to make short personal phone calls. It wasn't that hard to implement, just a DTMF decoder and a POTS interface board. We had improved capabilities once we replaced the repeater controller with a newer one that had this functionality built in. We were able to not only use DTMF tones to make phone calls, but to also patch into a network of linked 2m repeaters to converse with other HAMs throughout the state using VHF.
Actually in the US, mandatory tracking was put into place as part of enhanced 9-1-1. There were a rash of emergencies where the caller couldn't be located in a timely manner (IIRC one was a lady stuck in a car during a blizzard in the midwest). The law required phone companies to be able to give a location within 300m no later than 6 minutes of the request by a public safety answering point (PSAP). Radio location capabilities on the towers and GPS built into phones were a direct result of this law.
What the government did with the data once it became available to them is a different matter.
Slashdot Mirror
AC:
ColdWetDog:
AC:
I took your advice at heart and found this in Article 1 and Section 8
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
I agree we need to reform and scale back these entitlements. However, the laws that created those entitlements were constitutional and arguing otherwise is pointless and wastes energy that would be better used in drafting a workable reform bill.
This only affected how soon the congress people receive their pay raise. Look at the ridiculous incumbency rate despite of low approval ratings.
He didn't travel. So there's a shit load of savings right there.
I love the distortion too. No mention that it is part of the "In performance at the White House" program has been around since 1978 and airs on PBS and American Forces Network nor that "Corporate funding for this program is provided by Pepsi-Cola. Foundation support is provided by The Annenberg Foundation and the Anne Ray Charitable Trust. Major funding is also provided by the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, PBS and public television viewers. Support programming like In Performance at The White House through your local PBS station."
That's over the top.
If a corporation tells me what books I can't read, I can always say "fuck you" and go to a different corporation.
If a government tells me what books I can't read, I say "fuck you" and end up in prison or worse.
There is a not so subtle difference there.
But then we have to ask is it appropriate to force private enterprise to sell gay porn?
Yes that question was too sensational for the topic at hand since we are talking about one small image in a comic book filled with images. Also you'd think a book store would be able to handle a sale of adult oriented books to adults but despite all that, the question remains valid. Should a private company be forced to carry something that they themselves don't think is appropriate?
I think we all know the answer is no. Just like the author has the right to make that book, Apple has a right not to carry it. The only time this subject touches the "third rail" is when the government starts telling people what books can be written or sold.
The authors knew the risks when they included that image in Saga #2 and based on Apple's company policies I believe Apple is not homophobic. I think decisions like these keeps Apple in stores and bookstores that do restrict the types of media they sell to their customers (e.g. Walmart, christian bookstores, etc.).
Calm down. Try not to spill your latte on your vest and be careful with your hat. It's windy outside.
Jim Parsons' profession is what people call an actor and a pretty decent one at that.
Yes. It's part of the life span of a situational comedy.
How much extra recruiting is actually needed? They have TV shows like NCIS, NCIS:LA, and soon NCIS:Red Team. Not to mention movies like Zero Dark Thirty, Olympus has fallen, and G.I. Joe: Retaliation.
Geek blackface? WTF?
Quit trying to be a hipster and enjoy the show. I work in a similar environment where the show takes place and sometimes it is spot on. Working relationships between scientists and engineers, scientists competing for tenure while remaining friends, Theoretical physicists views toward Applied physicists, and personality quirks.
My colleagues and I love it when it cuts close to home but so over the top that it's funny when discussed around the water cooler.
Not quite the same. You are free to pick up a different newspaper at any time with very little effort or time.
Operating systems are a totally different matter. Unlike newspapers, you become more committed to the OS with each application you purchase that runs on that OS.
Not saying anything about the merits of the complaint, but the argument is that Google is giving away an OS in order to gain share of the smart phone market. Google doesn't make its revenue directly through from OS sales, instead it relies on advertising revenue which it unfairly gains by providing an OS for free that gives Google preferred status in searches and ad revenue. Microsoft knows this because they have used similar methods in the past.
I'm indifferent since a similar complaint was used against Microsoft's giving away IE for free in order to use the legal system to gain market share. Live by the courts - die by the courts.
The leftists will spew hate and dance on her grave. The right will honor her free market initiatives. The ones in the middle are caught in the crossfire. One of her quotes "“Standing in the middle of the road is very dangerous; you get knocked down by the traffic from both sides.” seems appropriate and sheds light on her political philosophy.
As an American, I can only say that she was well liked by us (at least our media). Not because of any economic policies but because it was the 80s and the brinkmanship with the Soviet Union was the #1 issue on both sides of the "pond". Reagan and Thatcher could pretty much do anything they wanted because we were more concerned about the cold war than anything else. The threat of nuclear war dominated our popular culture and the fall of the Soviet Union cemented Reagan's and Thatcher's place as the ones who made it possible to no longer have to worry about the threat of nuclear war.
As an outsider, it isn't fair for me to comment on her domestic policy. For the US, the 80's seemed decadent for the upwardly mobile segment of the population while the middle class waited for the benefits to trickle down as their economic security was threatened or eliminated. I'm assume the UK experience was similar with the upwardly mobile taking advantage of the deregulated markets and the middle class feeling the pressure from the lack of job security or outright job loss. The 80's was a conflicted time for the working class.
Anyway however how right or wrong her policies were, the number one reason why she was ultimately good for Great Britain was her stubbornness. The status quo wasn't a real option for Great Britain and it took her to put their government in a gear other than neutral. I think in the end history will note that it was her disruption of the status quo that was beneficial for her country and not necessarily her policies. Same can probably be said of Reagan in the US. Our economic system needed to be a little less regulated or government owned. Of course there is a huge difference from lessening government control/ownership and outright privatize everything and allow the market self regulate. Anyway back on topic...
My mild fondness for both Reagan and Thatcher is dampened by the reality that despite ultimately improving the GDP and political stature of both nations as well as eliminated the soviet threat, both countries now suffer from a society divided by the so called free market. I don't think it's really fair to place the blame entirely on the free market. Regardless, the short-term gains are now giving way to the long-term consequences.
I guess a self-conflicted comment is appropriate for the current subject...
Times are changing. There are many forces at work here:
1. Cutbacks in funding is making lead scientists look for ways to save money.
2. The proprietary vendors upgrading their software and charging license fees for each version (one particular vendor licenses specific minor versions).
3. The desire to share work and non-proprietary methods are the best way to do it.
4. New postdocs are familiar with python (they like working in iPython in particular) and its libraries.
5. R is gaining ground with the older scientists due to its features and price.
There was a large number of "whiny bitches" on here when WebKit forked from KHTML. People react to change. Life goes on.
Most of the new WiFi routers offer guest networks. Set one up and tell them to bring their own device. With the number of people with smartphones, I don't really see a legitimate need to set up guest computers.
You should be. We worked hard making components smaller, CPUs more energy efficient, touch screens more reliable, operating systems better suited for mobile environments, improved battery power density, created wireless protocols to support higher data rates, and constructed enough radio towers to support all this.
You act like it should have happened overnight.
I think he is referring to the Sizzler Sisters skits from Kids in the Hall.
The article is sensationalistic click bait.
I don't see any such language in the document that was linked within the article. All I see are laws against trafficking in passwords, unauthorized access to a computer system to obtain financial information, non-public information from any government agency, or damage critical infrastructure computers.
I used NX for X11 over VPN. It works very well and I am able to resume where I left off if my VPN connection drops or I want to let something run overnight but don't want to remain online. NoMachine closed source their server at version 4.0, but FreeNX and Neatx took its place.
Lopez. Lopez. Lopez. Lopez.
Before cell phones were cheap and everywhere, we had a large community of HAM operators who used our local 2m repeater to make short personal phone calls. It wasn't that hard to implement, just a DTMF decoder and a POTS interface board. We had improved capabilities once we replaced the repeater controller with a newer one that had this functionality built in. We were able to not only use DTMF tones to make phone calls, but to also patch into a network of linked 2m repeaters to converse with other HAMs throughout the state using VHF.
Actually in the US, mandatory tracking was put into place as part of enhanced 9-1-1. There were a rash of emergencies where the caller couldn't be located in a timely manner (IIRC one was a lady stuck in a car during a blizzard in the midwest). The law required phone companies to be able to give a location within 300m no later than 6 minutes of the request by a public safety answering point (PSAP). Radio location capabilities on the towers and GPS built into phones were a direct result of this law.
What the government did with the data once it became available to them is a different matter.
While the emerging display servers fight it out, I think I'll just stick to the tried and true X11.
This has already been covered:
Bitcoin Virtual Cash Get Money-Laundering Rule