That can be easily proven or disproven by the time stamps of the update and the call.
How so? According to the FTFA, Veloz was already outside of his car exchanging information when he was struck by Beas. For all we know, he made the 911 call prior to exiting his vehicle. The other thing I noticed that there weren't any mention of witnesses seeing Beas texting at the time of the accident. You'd think with spectators and the participants of the previous accident standing in the street that someone would have noticed what the driver of an oncoming vehicle was doing prior to the second accident.
I know I always look at the driver of an oncoming car to see if he sees me and I do this "instinctively", especially when I'm standing in the street.
While the plaintiff may think they have evidence of when both the 911 call and the Facebook update were made, I don't see any evidence showing WHERE they both were made. Now if we had a timestamp of when the Veloz was actually hit, that may be something useful.
Where I live if your child has excessive unexcused absences then both the child and the parent have to report to court. The parent can face fines and/or community service relating to contempt of court if the child continues to be truant or the parent doesn't show up for court.
It makes the parent responsible, and we don't condition our children to believe that "big brother" is normal. That's Google's job:P.
I think this has more to do with economics than ambiance. People with multifunction devices are more likely to plant themselves to a seat than a customer with a paperback. I'm sure there are people with traditional books that spend all day at a cafe, but they are outnumbered by the people with the electronic devices. More new customers equate to more revenue.
I also think that as soon as more customers go to a competitor in sufficient numbers that generates empty seats, the cafe owner would reconsider their stance against customers with e-readers.
I just want to make sure you remember that before 2001, we were not at war in Afghanistan, and before 2003 we were not at war in Iraq.
Yes I knew that. In fact that was my argument that the grand parent didn't include the war operations in the chart that he used which ended in 2001.
Likewise, the numbers you list are not inflation adjusted, which is one of the errors Solandri was highlighting.
You may have a point if the government continued to 1984 dollars, but each fiscal years budget is done using that current year's currency so we should be looking at the yearly average rate of change in inflation.
Using FY01 as a starting point for the DOD budget: Percent of change from previous year's budget
FY02 = 9.2%
FY03 = 26.6%
FY04 = 7.1%
FY05 = 2.3%
FY06 = 11.7%
FY07 = 12,3%
FY08 = 11.0%
FY09 = -0.7 %
FY10 = 0.3%
So comparing the rates of change of DOD with the rate of change in inflation, I still see the DOD budget trending upward from FY01 to FY08 and holding steady from FY08 to FY10.
The only thing Microsoft did to hurt FTP software was to finally include a TCP stack in windows, which was already standard in all the other OSes of the time.
FTP software was mismanaged and had a very public downward spiral. To pin this all on Microsoft after the fact is absurd.
Actually I think it would be better to keep a job. Be honest, you wouldn't quit a paying job. Of course you meant that you'd start looking at the employment sites during your off time.
I don't think this will be the end of Nokia. If anything it may be the smartest thing they've done. They obviously been stagnate way too long and there are just too many handset manufacturers jumping on the android bandwagon. This leaves Nokia with the option of being just another lemming going with Android or differentiating themselves by hooking up with Microsoft. Frankly going with Google or Microsoft is better than Nokia's status quo.
The $660 billion I quoted included Overseas Contingency Operations (the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan) [defense.gov]. Total baseline DoD funding in FY2010 was $534 billion, OCO was $130 billion, for a total $664 billion.
Where is the downward trend that you talked about? From your document:
All I see is an upward trend from FY01 to FY08 then it holds steady from FY08 to FY10. Absolutely NO downward trend. So where did your evidence of a downward trend come from originally? Oh yea that that chart from cbo.gov that ends at 2001. BTW as I mentioned before that chart does not include the war operations.
The sad thing is the Overseas Contingency Operations budget request for FY2010 doesn't include the human cost that I also mentioned. That would be handled by a separate agency called the US Department of Veterans Affairs which submitted a FY11 budget proposal requesting $125B which will be the second year of large budget increases in VA's discretionary budget which is up 20% since 2009.
If you haven't noticed thats a lot of $Bs in this post. While the repubs are now pretending to be the fiscal hawks, they keep looking away from these numbers when people ask where did all this debt originate.
I'd eagerly go vote for someone who was willing to cut spending on defense, and I know a lot of people who agree with that sentiment. We spend way too much on it.
I thought we did, and I thought he won. Boy do I have egg on my face...
I wish your post was true, but unfortunately it's only a half-truth. The institutional spending done by the DoD may be trending downward, but the operational spending done by the DoD is astronomical. The war on two fronts is not included in the DoD budget, nor are the long-term expenses such as the debt that the war accrued and the expenses relating to war casualties.
Gutenberg published the only approved Bible at the time, the Vulgate. And, just so you know, the Douay-Rheims translation of the bible, which is in English, was published by the Catholic Church before the King James Version was published. The only excuse they have relating to "keeping the Bible from the People" is that there was no printing press until Gutenberg invented it!
Just so you know, english isn't the only language.
Martin Luther published his translation of the New Testament in german in 1522 and the Old Testament followed in 1534. This is before Douay-Rheims translation of the New Testament in 1582 (60 years after Martin Luther's translation) and the Old Testament in two volumes in 1609 and 1610 (76 years after Martin Luther's translation).
Douay-Rheims is not even the first english translation of the latin Vulgate. That honor goes to John Wycliffe and what came known as Wycliffe's Bible that began circulation in 1382 (which is 228 years before Douay-Rheims). Having no printing press isn't a good excuse. John Wycliffe and his followers hand scribed each copy of their bible. John Wycliffe is considered the "morning star of the reformation".
Congratulations you read a post from wsxyz correcting my post, and my response to him! He did it by stating historical facts and not by linking blogs from questionable sources.
Good for you, you found a way to look like you learned something without all that hard work of actually picking up a book.
By the way, that post didn't dispute the contents of my post, just that I wrongly attributed to Gutenberg what Luther had done.
Other than correcting an error that I've made and expounding on the church's version of why they forbade the dissemination of the Bible, I don't see him actually making a counter point. I still find it amusing that you think that I'm the troll.
Gutenberg got in trouble for having a heated discussion with two archbishops this is why he was exiled (it may something to do with debts he accrued). Gutenberg's invention led to the mass dissemination of the Bible, but not necessarily Gutenberg himself. In fact, Gutenberg made money printing indulgences for the church (I found this factoid while double checking for this post).
It was Martin Luther that translated the Bible from latin to the native language of the people (german), and inspired the translation for the KJV of the Bible.
Sorry about the confusion, I ran into the risk of doing that when I mention both men in the same post:P
If you can't bring yourself to take my word for it, then please do your own research. There are history books at your local library, and you could follow your own advise and use Google. Just don't limit yourself to the catholic church for the information.
I'm not going to post citations, and quite frankly I'm pretty startled that your view on historical facts are so skewed and incomplete. Look up "Johannes Gutenburg" and "Martin Luther". Why should I limit your research to links that I can provide?
What you are asking me to do is equivalent to provide sources for the fact that water is wet.
Saying, in a nutshell, "this is a fact" with no logical or historical basis besides common misconception is illogical. What do they call this, again? Oh, right: "If you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it".
I'm shocked on how ignorant you have kept yourself. For your own good, please go to a library or even better take a history class.
Did you even read the articled I linked to? The point I'm trying to make is that they were never different. The only major differences in the Catholic Church between now and then is the number of officially approved doctrines, political power, and how we now use native translations in places like America (New American Bible, for example).
I'm sure a large number of dead spaniards and anabaptists would disagree with you.
Slashdot Mirror
How so? According to the FTFA, Veloz was already outside of his car exchanging information when he was struck by Beas. For all we know, he made the 911 call prior to exiting his vehicle. The other thing I noticed that there weren't any mention of witnesses seeing Beas texting at the time of the accident. You'd think with spectators and the participants of the previous accident standing in the street that someone would have noticed what the driver of an oncoming vehicle was doing prior to the second accident.
I know I always look at the driver of an oncoming car to see if he sees me and I do this "instinctively", especially when I'm standing in the street.
While the plaintiff may think they have evidence of when both the 911 call and the Facebook update were made, I don't see any evidence showing WHERE they both were made. Now if we had a timestamp of when the Veloz was actually hit, that may be something useful.
By your argument, Google's Android shouldn't have seen the light of day since it was at one time the least mobile OS sold.
Where I live if your child has excessive unexcused absences then both the child and the parent have to report to court. The parent can face fines and/or community service relating to contempt of court if the child continues to be truant or the parent doesn't show up for court.
It makes the parent responsible, and we don't condition our children to believe that "big brother" is normal. That's Google's job :P.
Unfortunately, the patent system is being abused and the USPTO appears ill-equipped to evaluate the patent worthiness of software.
If word processing was patented then Wang would have prevented most of home and small business computing in the 80's. It could've happened.
I'm not commenting on the validity of Oracle's patents that they purchased from Sun.
I looked at it and it appears to be owned by Oracle. Was there something else we were supposed to look at?
Yes but we all miss the Lion King.
I think Dell, HP, Lenovo, and countless small computer shops have done quite well by manufacturing computers for Microsoft Windows.
Microsoft predatory towards other software companies? Yes. Microsoft benefit hardware manufacturers? Yes.
The question is -- Does Nokia make money from hardware or software?
Yes!
Absolutely.
I think this has more to do with economics than ambiance. People with multifunction devices are more likely to plant themselves to a seat than a customer with a paperback. I'm sure there are people with traditional books that spend all day at a cafe, but they are outnumbered by the people with the electronic devices. More new customers equate to more revenue.
I also think that as soon as more customers go to a competitor in sufficient numbers that generates empty seats, the cafe owner would reconsider their stance against customers with e-readers.
Yes I knew that. In fact that was my argument that the grand parent didn't include the war operations in the chart that he used which ended in 2001.
You may have a point if the government continued to 1984 dollars, but each fiscal years budget is done using that current year's currency so we should be looking at the yearly average rate of change in inflation.
Year - Avg Change in Inflation
FY01 = 2.8%
FY02 = 1.6%
FY03 = 2.3%
FY04 = 2.7%
FY05 = 3.4%
FY06 = 3.2%
FY07 = 2.8%
FY08 = 3.8%
FY09 = (-0.4%)
FY10 = 1.6%
Using FY01 as a starting point for the DOD budget: Percent of change from previous year's budget
FY02 = 9.2%
FY03 = 26.6%
FY04 = 7.1%
FY05 = 2.3%
FY06 = 11.7%
FY07 = 12,3%
FY08 = 11.0%
FY09 = -0.7 %
FY10 = 0.3%
So comparing the rates of change of DOD with the rate of change in inflation, I still see the DOD budget trending upward from FY01 to FY08 and holding steady from FY08 to FY10.
The only thing Microsoft did to hurt FTP software was to finally include a TCP stack in windows, which was already standard in all the other OSes of the time.
FTP software was mismanaged and had a very public downward spiral. To pin this all on Microsoft after the fact is absurd.
Actually I think it would be better to keep a job. Be honest, you wouldn't quit a paying job. Of course you meant that you'd start looking at the employment sites during your off time.
I don't think this will be the end of Nokia. If anything it may be the smartest thing they've done. They obviously been stagnate way too long and there are just too many handset manufacturers jumping on the android bandwagon. This leaves Nokia with the option of being just another lemming going with Android or differentiating themselves by hooking up with Microsoft. Frankly going with Google or Microsoft is better than Nokia's status quo.
Where is the downward trend that you talked about? From your document:
FY01 = $316B
FY02 = $345B
FY03 = $437B
FY04 = $468B
FY05 = $479B
FY06 = $535B
FY07 = $601B
FY08 = $667B
FY09 = $662B
FY10 = $664B
All I see is an upward trend from FY01 to FY08 then it holds steady from FY08 to FY10. Absolutely NO downward trend. So where did your evidence of a downward trend come from originally? Oh yea that that chart from cbo.gov that ends at 2001. BTW as I mentioned before that chart does not include the war operations.
The sad thing is the Overseas Contingency Operations budget request for FY2010 doesn't include the human cost that I also mentioned. That would be handled by a separate agency called the US Department of Veterans Affairs which submitted a FY11 budget proposal requesting $125B which will be the second year of large budget increases in VA's discretionary budget which is up 20% since 2009.
If you haven't noticed thats a lot of $Bs in this post. While the repubs are now pretending to be the fiscal hawks, they keep looking away from these numbers when people ask where did all this debt originate.
I thought we did, and I thought he won. Boy do I have egg on my face...
He could have meant the patriot act. I guess he needed to be more specific.
I wish your post was true, but unfortunately it's only a half-truth. The institutional spending done by the DoD may be trending downward, but the operational spending done by the DoD is astronomical. The war on two fronts is not included in the DoD budget, nor are the long-term expenses such as the debt that the war accrued and the expenses relating to war casualties.
Speaking of not getting much out of education, someone confused science education with science research.
One is mostly the Department of Education, the other are a variety of agencies that are suffering cuts.
Our science research is one of the things we do well.
Just so you know, english isn't the only language.
Martin Luther published his translation of the New Testament in german in 1522 and the Old Testament followed in 1534. This is before Douay-Rheims translation of the New Testament in 1582 (60 years after Martin Luther's translation) and the Old Testament in two volumes in 1609 and 1610 (76 years after Martin Luther's translation).
Douay-Rheims is not even the first english translation of the latin Vulgate. That honor goes to John Wycliffe and what came known as Wycliffe's Bible that began circulation in 1382 (which is 228 years before Douay-Rheims). Having no printing press isn't a good excuse. John Wycliffe and his followers hand scribed each copy of their bible. John Wycliffe is considered the "morning star of the reformation".
Congratulations you read a post from wsxyz correcting my post, and my response to him! He did it by stating historical facts and not by linking blogs from questionable sources.
Good for you, you found a way to look like you learned something without all that hard work of actually picking up a book.
By the way, that post didn't dispute the contents of my post, just that I wrongly attributed to Gutenberg what Luther had done.
That you need to educate yourself...
Other than correcting an error that I've made and expounding on the church's version of why they forbade the dissemination of the Bible, I don't see him actually making a counter point. I still find it amusing that you think that I'm the troll.
Whoops! Thanks for catching that.
Gutenberg got in trouble for having a heated discussion with two archbishops this is why he was exiled (it may something to do with debts he accrued). Gutenberg's invention led to the mass dissemination of the Bible, but not necessarily Gutenberg himself. In fact, Gutenberg made money printing indulgences for the church (I found this factoid while double checking for this post).
It was Martin Luther that translated the Bible from latin to the native language of the people (german), and inspired the translation for the KJV of the Bible.
Sorry about the confusion, I ran into the risk of doing that when I mention both men in the same post :P
It's only trollish because you disagree.
If you can't bring yourself to take my word for it, then please do your own research. There are history books at your local library, and you could follow your own advise and use Google. Just don't limit yourself to the catholic church for the information.
I'm not going to post citations, and quite frankly I'm pretty startled that your view on historical facts are so skewed and incomplete. Look up "Johannes Gutenburg" and "Martin Luther". Why should I limit your research to links that I can provide?
What you are asking me to do is equivalent to provide sources for the fact that water is wet.
I'm shocked on how ignorant you have kept yourself. For your own good, please go to a library or even better take a history class.
Jesus advises us to seek help from another and provide help to another this way we both are healed.
James 5:16 does not explicitly give the power to hear confessions to priests or the church.
I'm sure a large number of dead spaniards and anabaptists would disagree with you.