I'm pretty sure that it's intentional and insidious. Check the rotten article. He actually lost a Congressional election because his opponent said he was too smart and rich, and couldn't relate to the common man. I don't really know how many fence-sitters are going to be listening to the Bush campaign's smears, and those that take them seriously are just the rabid Bush followers that would vote for Bush over Jesus.
No, but as I was talking specifically about Kerry, am I likely to say the Democrats are going to jump all over him? I'm never claiming that Democrats don't do this, and I don't particularly side with one or the other (they're all douchebags).
Gah, stop looking at things as left and right. Say Democrats and Republicans, those are more accurate. Left and right narrow your scope too much. There are more than two ideologies, and none of them are completely right (though I tend to be more pro-liberalism/socialism). But if you want an example of disloyalty, how about Secretary of Education Rod Page calling the NEA a terrorist organization when they protested the No Child Left Behind Act? Also, a clever part on the Bush administration is to never explicitly call a particular American a terrorist, but it's pretty clear. How else would most of the republican bloggers I see get that idea (hint, it's not independent thinking) or Fox news be throwing the word left and right (again, not by thinking it through)?
It's only the hardcore republicans that won't see how well Kerry did. In my view Kerry was (relatively) concise and clear. He knew what he was talking about and delivered his message to the American people.
I think John Stewart (?) said it best when he said something to the effect of "For the first time I thought the American people might not just be voting against Bush, but actually for Kerry." Kerry shone. Republicans of course are going to spin it (and I saw many times where Kerry had a slight misstatement that they're going to jump all over) but nobody else will mistake the President's desperation for anything but that.
Good call. Let's use nukes. That's not the most horrific suggestion I've heard.
Let's take a look at this for a moment, if you were invaded by Russia (let's go back to the cold war for a moment), don't you think you would be killing every Red you could get your hands on? If we were to use the terminology of today, you'd be a terrorist, and so would I. Then Russia drops nukes all over the place. Would you give up? Your captors would be as inhuman as we'd always made them out to be, are you going to sit there and take it?
Nukes shouldn't even be a last resort, the human life toll is way too high. This is why the telephone between the Kremlin and White House was installed. Nobody wants nuclear war, except those wierdos who have a very skewed perspective of how terrible they actually are.
If it was a troll, it wasn't meant to be. I just have trouble seeing what other people see in Java. Having tried it myself, and the things that were simple in C were made more complex than they should have been when implemented in Java. Also the inability to deviate from the object orientation is a killer for me. It seems to take away from the actual code and simply focus on the structure.
When I call it inefficient, I mean that when I write a perl script (a self-proclaimed inefficient language) to implement the same things I've seen done in Java (admittedly very low level, as I haven't gotten into hardcore Java, primarily because of the repulsion I've had from early experiences) the perl script runs faster.
Anyway, just thought I'd explain, because apparently I came off worse than I meant.
Divination is a particularly bad occupation. Why waste your time making predictions about things you couldn't possibly know? It just makes you sound like a douchebag when you're wrong. (Which is probably more often than not.)
Ah, I see you were referring to C#. I don't particularly use C-based languages (I prefer perl, but I do have a little grounding in C++, and to my great regret, Java), so I don't know much about it. Meh, if it's that bad it wouldn't surprise me, as other Microsoft languages tend to suck, (think Basic and VB.) but I seriously doubt that it could possibly be worse than Java.
Good lord, have you actually programmed in Java? Object orientation is a terribly inefficient way to program. True, at some points it may come in handy, but I have yet to see an implementation that couldn't be done with fancy subroutines in a function oriented language. Also, what about compile times and the fact that Java actually doesn't work on all interfaces? They changed their virtual machine too much when porting it (seems the only logical explanation to me) and didn't change it in the versions they ported from. (And as a side note, I don't like the fact that you have to type four lines of code to do what C++ could do with a simple cin >> var;
On another note, why should Microsoft be afraid? Are you under the impression that they own C or C++? The only thing Microsoft's in danger of losing to Sun is the worst implementation of a good idea.
Re:Another 50 years of HEP...
on
Happy 50th Cern!
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
Over in the sense that all that's left are questions like 'What is energy?'
Just like the future of physics since 1894 lay in the seventh decimal place.
Hold the phone. MSN can reencode all buddy images (or equivalent) to pngs, but IE can't render pngs with transparent backgrounds? May be a silly question, but isn't that a bit odd?
Agreed. What I see as one of the great things about Linux is that it can be customized in so many ways. Of course nothing will fit your needs exactly like an LFS, but having a lot of distros means you're more likely to find one that is pretty close to what you need.
So looking at this pragmatically, how will this help anything but to raise prices of telcos? They're not going to increase their processing power at a higher rate than home PCs, so they'll be forced to buy the newest hardware in such quantities to make it a burden on the customers. As individual computers increase in power, so will the internet increase in bandwidth.
The sheer number of users that were the cause of telcos ceasing to store logs will suddenly be immaterial if the law is passed?
Eh, just invite them to a screening of Brazil. Risking a spoiler, a major topic is the use of constant fear to spy on anyone, and nobody cares when a mistake's made.
You're confusing socialism with it's realized analog Communism. Socialism doesn't have to stifle free speech and competition. A socialised system would just take care of the people that are not fortunate enough to be the rich. This is stuff like universal health care and protection from monopolies.
"The 2nd revolution is long over due, before the "American experiment" fails, and its remains fall into hardcore socialism."
Meh. Risking being unAmerican by Ashcroftian standards (i.e. sex inside wedlock) if this is the end product of capitalism, give me socialism. Give me a government that gives a shit about its people because it actually is the people.
It's not spamming. Congressmen are *supposed* to be responsive to their constituents. If you're calling them up to sell them viagra or see if they want to refinance, yeah, that's phone spam. But this is sharing your views, and SaveBetamax is trying to get such a quantity of calls so that we cannot be ignored, as I am when I contact my congressmen (Kit Bond, Jim Talent, Todd Akin, if the names mean anything to you).
Interestingly, if you shoot them and kill them, you're within your rights (assuming of course your life was in danger and that it's fairly evident), but can be sued if you handicap them as a result (i.e. shoot them in the shin). No citations, I just heard this from a local cop.
Really, to blame Europe now for its past imperialism is silly. And in all fairness, America did expand itself to stretch across a continent. And then when we did that, we found new frontiers like China, Hawaii, and the Philipines.
As far as I know, European countries no longer have any colonial holdings, and the most America has is Puerto Rico.
When people talk about imperialism now, they're often referring to corporate imperialism, because it's a lot harder to come up with a moral justification (i.e. "uplifting and Christianize" our "little brown brothers" -Mckinley) nowadays, though Bush is sure giving it a hell of a try ("axis of evil" "spreading democracy").
Also, what major technological divisions are there? Out of curiosity. I don't have much knowledge on the subject, but it seems to make sense that allies would keep each other fairly updated on advancements, so a large technological disparity seems a bit odd.
Re:Jesus didn't walk on the water
on
Robot Walks on Water
·
· Score: 2, Insightful
From what I've heard, the gospels never survived in their original forms (if they were more than simply oral tradition for a time) and the names of disciples were used to lend credibility to the texts, rather than accurately tell who recorded them.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm pretty sure that it's intentional and insidious. Check the rotten article. He actually lost a Congressional election because his opponent said he was too smart and rich, and couldn't relate to the common man. I don't really know how many fence-sitters are going to be listening to the Bush campaign's smears, and those that take them seriously are just the rabid Bush followers that would vote for Bush over Jesus.
No, but as I was talking specifically about Kerry, am I likely to say the Democrats are going to jump all over him? I'm never claiming that Democrats don't do this, and I don't particularly side with one or the other (they're all douchebags).
Boo for me.
But if you want an example of disloyalty, how...
That should have read "example of calling dissenters disloyal".
Gah, stop looking at things as left and right. Say Democrats and Republicans, those are more accurate. Left and right narrow your scope too much. There are more than two ideologies, and none of them are completely right (though I tend to be more pro-liberalism/socialism). But if you want an example of disloyalty, how about Secretary of Education Rod Page calling the NEA a terrorist organization when they protested the No Child Left Behind Act? Also, a clever part on the Bush administration is to never explicitly call a particular American a terrorist, but it's pretty clear. How else would most of the republican bloggers I see get that idea (hint, it's not independent thinking) or Fox news be throwing the word left and right (again, not by thinking it through)?
It's only the hardcore republicans that won't see how well Kerry did. In my view Kerry was (relatively) concise and clear. He knew what he was talking about and delivered his message to the American people. I think John Stewart (?) said it best when he said something to the effect of "For the first time I thought the American people might not just be voting against Bush, but actually for Kerry." Kerry shone. Republicans of course are going to spin it (and I saw many times where Kerry had a slight misstatement that they're going to jump all over) but nobody else will mistake the President's desperation for anything but that.
Good call. Let's use nukes. That's not the most horrific suggestion I've heard. Let's take a look at this for a moment, if you were invaded by Russia (let's go back to the cold war for a moment), don't you think you would be killing every Red you could get your hands on? If we were to use the terminology of today, you'd be a terrorist, and so would I. Then Russia drops nukes all over the place. Would you give up? Your captors would be as inhuman as we'd always made them out to be, are you going to sit there and take it? Nukes shouldn't even be a last resort, the human life toll is way too high. This is why the telephone between the Kremlin and White House was installed. Nobody wants nuclear war, except those wierdos who have a very skewed perspective of how terrible they actually are.
If it was a troll, it wasn't meant to be. I just have trouble seeing what other people see in Java. Having tried it myself, and the things that were simple in C were made more complex than they should have been when implemented in Java. Also the inability to deviate from the object orientation is a killer for me. It seems to take away from the actual code and simply focus on the structure. When I call it inefficient, I mean that when I write a perl script (a self-proclaimed inefficient language) to implement the same things I've seen done in Java (admittedly very low level, as I haven't gotten into hardcore Java, primarily because of the repulsion I've had from early experiences) the perl script runs faster. Anyway, just thought I'd explain, because apparently I came off worse than I meant.
Divination is a particularly bad occupation. Why waste your time making predictions about things you couldn't possibly know? It just makes you sound like a douchebag when you're wrong. (Which is probably more often than not.)
Ah, I see you were referring to C#. I don't particularly use C-based languages (I prefer perl, but I do have a little grounding in C++, and to my great regret, Java), so I don't know much about it. Meh, if it's that bad it wouldn't surprise me, as other Microsoft languages tend to suck, (think Basic and VB.) but I seriously doubt that it could possibly be worse than Java.
Good lord, have you actually programmed in Java? Object orientation is a terribly inefficient way to program. True, at some points it may come in handy, but I have yet to see an implementation that couldn't be done with fancy subroutines in a function oriented language. Also, what about compile times and the fact that Java actually doesn't work on all interfaces? They changed their virtual machine too much when porting it (seems the only logical explanation to me) and didn't change it in the versions they ported from. (And as a side note, I don't like the fact that you have to type four lines of code to do what C++ could do with a simple cin >> var;
On another note, why should Microsoft be afraid? Are you under the impression that they own C or C++? The only thing Microsoft's in danger of losing to Sun is the worst implementation of a good idea.
Over in the sense that all that's left are questions like 'What is energy?'
Just like the future of physics since 1894 lay in the seventh decimal place.
Hold the phone. MSN can reencode all buddy images (or equivalent) to pngs, but IE can't render pngs with transparent backgrounds? May be a silly question, but isn't that a bit odd?
Agreed. What I see as one of the great things about Linux is that it can be customized in so many ways. Of course nothing will fit your needs exactly like an LFS, but having a lot of distros means you're more likely to find one that is pretty close to what you need.
Damn you Nietzsche, you trend setter.
So looking at this pragmatically, how will this help anything but to raise prices of telcos? They're not going to increase their processing power at a higher rate than home PCs, so they'll be forced to buy the newest hardware in such quantities to make it a burden on the customers. As individual computers increase in power, so will the internet increase in bandwidth. The sheer number of users that were the cause of telcos ceasing to store logs will suddenly be immaterial if the law is passed?
Eh, just invite them to a screening of Brazil. Risking a spoiler, a major topic is the use of constant fear to spy on anyone, and nobody cares when a mistake's made.
You're confusing socialism with it's realized analog Communism. Socialism doesn't have to stifle free speech and competition. A socialised system would just take care of the people that are not fortunate enough to be the rich. This is stuff like universal health care and protection from monopolies.
I agree. If media recording devices are banned, it will rival sodomy and traffic violations for most widely ignored laws.
"The 2nd revolution is long over due, before the "American experiment" fails, and its remains fall into hardcore socialism." Meh. Risking being unAmerican by Ashcroftian standards (i.e. sex inside wedlock) if this is the end product of capitalism, give me socialism. Give me a government that gives a shit about its people because it actually is the people.
It's not spamming. Congressmen are *supposed* to be responsive to their constituents. If you're calling them up to sell them viagra or see if they want to refinance, yeah, that's phone spam. But this is sharing your views, and SaveBetamax is trying to get such a quantity of calls so that we cannot be ignored, as I am when I contact my congressmen (Kit Bond, Jim Talent, Todd Akin, if the names mean anything to you).
Interestingly, if you shoot them and kill them, you're within your rights (assuming of course your life was in danger and that it's fairly evident), but can be sued if you handicap them as a result (i.e. shoot them in the shin). No citations, I just heard this from a local cop.
Really, to blame Europe now for its past imperialism is silly. And in all fairness, America did expand itself to stretch across a continent. And then when we did that, we found new frontiers like China, Hawaii, and the Philipines.
As far as I know, European countries no longer have any colonial holdings, and the most America has is Puerto Rico.
When people talk about imperialism now, they're often referring to corporate imperialism, because it's a lot harder to come up with a moral justification (i.e. "uplifting and Christianize" our "little brown brothers" -Mckinley) nowadays, though Bush is sure giving it a hell of a try ("axis of evil" "spreading democracy").
Also, what major technological divisions are there? Out of curiosity. I don't have much knowledge on the subject, but it seems to make sense that allies would keep each other fairly updated on advancements, so a large technological disparity seems a bit odd.
Then we all went into the cloak room... and found ourselves standing near a lamp post in the snow.
Boooo!
From what I've heard, the gospels never survived in their original forms (if they were more than simply oral tradition for a time) and the names of disciples were used to lend credibility to the texts, rather than accurately tell who recorded them.