The Japanese automaker said that it had isolated the problem to a "friction device" within the pedals in the more than 4 million vehicles it has recalled worldwide and -- in the U.S. -- temporarily stopped selling and producing altogether.
The fix, which Toyota characterized as "both effective and simple," involves installing a steel reinforcement bar into the pedal assembly in order to reduce friction.
While that fix will be conducted on consumers' vehicles, newly produced cars and trucks subject to the action will receive entirely new pedal assemblies, Toyota said. Production of those vehicles, on six assembly lines in the U.S. and Canada, ceased Monday, but will begin again Feb. 8, the automaker said.
The recall repair is entirely mechanical. The electronics issues is a red herring be sensationalist media, trying to create a problem where none exists.
There is no point in continuing this discussion. You dont believe in brainwashing and you don't believe in mental abuse. Maybe for mindless religious crackpots such as yourself this may be true, but for the rest of us with a brain these are very real.
You claim to be a Christian but poor people can simply rot without receiving needed healthcare, while you refuse to even acknowledge they have a problem, let alone help them.
You think it is perfectly ok to teach children religious dogma and racist bullshit and to justify killing other people - you are sick.
Your arguments are circular and consist on nothing more than stating truisms. It's clear you know nothing about religion, law or the constitution except your own flawed understanding of it, which is more about what you *think* the law should be rather than what it is.
Open your eyes and your mind and really try to understand the world around you - not just the distorted version you learned from your religious cult.
I will pray for your soul and those of your family to hope that you will eventually see a better life, free of the hatred and prejudice that you now have.
Don't bother responding, I refuse to read any more of your drivel.
I took this exam while there and there are several good reasons for the marks to be low
1 - University of Waterloo has one of the best Engineering and Math programs in North America. As such it attracts a lot of foreign students that do not have English as their first language. My Computer Engineering class consisted of approximately 80% first generation or foreign born students. (PS: this is a fact, not intended as a racial slight or a bad thing at all)
2 - The ELPE exam is (when I took it anyway) the first morning after frosh weekend. I was still half plastered when I wrote it and I'm sure many others were too. English skills are not the best at 8am and hung over.
This is ridiculous. I can't believe you advocate brainwashing of children to kill. How Christian of you.
You keep bringing up the amendments (actually you just added to the list) but I dont see how any of that applies to a minimum standard of education:
First - freedonm of religion and speech. Nothing about education.
Fourth - guards against unreasonable searches - nothing about education
Fifth - due process in the judicial suystem - nothing about education
Fourteenth - citizenship, right to vote, and you cannot question the federal debt - nothing about education
So why exactly do any of hte above apply to the discussion of noone being able to impose a minumum standard of education? If you want to make up excuses to keep your children stupid, then go ahead but I really dont see what the problem is.
So you're stuck. You can think that I should have to conform to a "minimum standard" of education, but constitutionally, you have no way to enforce it, unless you are going to claim that homeschooling itself is evidence of wrongdoing.
That argument makes absolutely ZERO sense.
I am doing a disservice to my kids, and failing my obligations as a parent, to subject my will for what is best for them to the government's will, especially when it has no right to enforce its will in the first place.
This makes no sense. Your point of view is completely without basis.
So because they are your kids, the government can tell you NOTHING about how to raise them.
Correct.
So if you want to pull them out of school and teach them how evolution is evil, or blacks are evil, or Muslims are evil then you should have that right.
Also correct.
But as long as there's a First Amendment, government has no right to say that teaching a child any of those things you described is a violation of that child's rights.
So by your logic, it is perfectly acceptable for certain Muslim children to be brainwashed that America is evil and to be taught how to use a weapon and kill, and that they will be rewarded b y sacrificing their life? This brainwashing is perfectly within their rights according to you since they are only TEACHING the children not actually doing any physical harm to the children or anyone else.
your right to life means you have a right to not have someone else TAKE your life. It means you have a right to DEFEND your life. It does NOT mean that anyone else is obligated to KEEP YOU ALIVE.
You are adding words. the phrase is 'right to life'. Why limit it to taking or defending life? Why do you not see life can also be the ACT of living?
No one is erecting a barricade to you keeping yourself alive. No such barricade exists. You're inventing things that aren't real.
A financial barricade IS a barricade. What is the point of having a right to something if it is effectively unavailable to them?
Like I said, I believe home schooling CAN be a very good thing, and some children will prosper under home schooling vs institution learning. The ONLY thing I asserted is that ALL learning institutions must conform to a minimum standard of care and curriculum for the children. If a parent or teacher or priest want to teach more than that then that is their right. I'm talking about a minimum acceptable standard of teaching. Thats it. I don't see why you are opposed to such a thing.
If you knew much about modern evangelical Protestant Christianity, you would know that it considers itself to be nothing more than Judaism + Christ.
Umm but that's what ALL Christians believe.
Many of this faith believe that Jewish people will be saved under the Abrahamic covenant, whereas everyone else must be saved under the Messianic covenant.
Arrogance. Concentrate on saving yourself, not others.
You don't know much about religions. Christianity believes that people are justified before God from the sacrifice of God-made-flesh. This is entirely different from Islam,
I don't think you know much about religions, why do you believe Islam is different?
No, he did not. He said that government should be responsible for securing your RIGHT to life, liberty, and property. There's a big difference. Bastiat NEVER would have expressed that government has any obligation to keep you alive, so the answer to your question is "yes, but it does not secure your RIGHT to life."
If its impossible to do your rights have been violated. You may have a right to cross the street but if there is a barricade preventing you to cross, then your rights have been violated.
Clearly you do not equate physical abuse with mental abuse. Talk with some women who have been mentally abused by their husbands by condescending and derogatory statements, swearing and yelling, and see if no harm has ever come to them.
Until a fetus has a functioning brain, it is not sentient - alive yes but not sentient. It is no more different than my thumb or fingernail.
If you think sentient life begins at conception (two cells) and should be protected, then all life should be protected - especially since they are more sentient like an ant for example.
This view of yours... it actually sounds a lot like a religion itself. And you assert it's right, and that those who disagree with it are wrong.
No. I do not have the arrogance to push my beliefs on anyone elses. As for other beliefs, I listen to what they believe and augment my own if I think it makes sense. I do not pass judgement on anyone elses religious beliefs, since I nor anyone else can positively know the true answer.
You do realize that islam and Christianity all came from Judaism? They all share a common 'old testament' for the lack of a better world?
ALL religions are talking about the same basic beliefs. There is no right or wrong when everyone is talking about the same thing but in different languages.
A company claims it has the technology to make writing on touchscreens more like writing with pencil and paper, when the harder you press the thicker the line you produce.
Anyways, for what it's worth, I find the monkey's story selection has been consistently good - interesting and relevant
Except the capability in the article (quoted above) I had on my tablet from 5 years ago. Press harder on hte stylus and you get a thicker line. Why exactly is this new or fascinating?
FALSE - there is no such thing as a 'right religion'. To say so implies there is a 'wrong' religion. With so many religions in the world what are the odds you were born into the 'right' one? What constitutes a 'right' religion? Did God himself come down and announce on TV 'Hey everyone, the Purple Striped Lamb of God followers in northern New Zealand got it right. The rest of you all should have known better and are going to hell'.
The world will be a lot better place to live when everyone realizes that there is no such thing as 'my god' and 'your god'. Everyone is really talking about the exact same thing, with the interpretations diverging because people push what they want to believe into the religion.
Want to kill someone? There's a bible or koran verse to justify that. Be vegetarian? Yup. Eat animals? Yup. Hate gays? Yup. Love everyone? Yup. Beat your children? Yup.
If people stop reading what they want to in the message and actually LISTEN to the message, we'd all just get along.
A fetus, which is biologically a distinct and unique human life.
It's only a fetus after 10 weeks. Before that it is an embryo.
I call it what people have called it for millennia: a child in the womb.
Actually it probably wasn't mentioned much. And in the first trimester the woman probably never realized she was pregnant. Before the 1500s, how life develops in the womb wasn't much understood at all.
who is GOVERNMENT to tell me I have to follow ITS rules for MY kids?
So because they are your kids, the government can tell you NOTHING about how to raise them. So if you want to pull them out of school and teach them how evolution is evil, or blacks are evil, or Muslims are evil then you should have that right. And if you want to sexually abuse them and smack them around at your own will then thats solely your business too and the government has no right to interfere.
Free does not mean absolute freedom to do anything you wish as any time.
As long as they are not causing harm to someone else, they ARE free to do anything they like
Really? Try driving around without a seatbelt. Try being naked in your own backyard.
Great. Now all you have to do is demonstrate that Christianity is a lie.
Who the hell said anything about Christianity being a lie?
But what we are talking about is your so called right to teach your children anything you like without the state being able to impose any minimum standard of a curriculum. I would say this is inherently harmful to the child, along the lines of sexual or mental abuse.
Instead of school lets say you wanted to teach your child to drive a car - perfectly legal and acceptable., However that child still must demonstrate a certain amount of competence via a government run standardized exam. You cannot state 'I taught my child the way I want her to drive an you have no right to impose any regulations on it!' It's clearly ludicrous. Isn't education more important than learning how to drive? So why should\n't there be a minimum standard?
And again, universal health care -- when forced by government -- IS socialist. By definition.
You clearly want to discuss that too. Clearly you dont know or understand the difference between a social program and socialism. You bring up forced by the government as a criteria. So would the legal system be socialist since it is government forced and you are not allowed to go buy your own judge? How about the public school system? What about government paid roads and highways? Government imposed taxes? The military?
Why are those examples of government run social programs not socialist but healthcare is?
Bastiat promoted that the government should be responsible for defending an individuals life, liberty and property. Does not universal healthcare help defend someones life? For many who cannot afford doctors they would die without this program. So basically he is advocating for a social healthcare system.
The US has the best healthcare in the world - for the 5% of the population that can actually afford it.
Slashdot Mirror
No, check here: http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-toyota-recall2-2010feb02,0,1031407.story?track=rss&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+latimes/mostviewed+(L.A.+Times+-+Most+Viewed+Stories)
The Japanese automaker said that it had isolated the problem to a "friction device" within the pedals in the more than 4 million vehicles it has recalled worldwide and -- in the U.S. -- temporarily stopped selling and producing altogether.
The fix, which Toyota characterized as "both effective and simple," involves installing a steel reinforcement bar into the pedal assembly in order to reduce friction.
While that fix will be conducted on consumers' vehicles, newly produced cars and trucks subject to the action will receive entirely new pedal assemblies, Toyota said. Production of those vehicles, on six assembly lines in the U.S. and Canada, ceased Monday, but will begin again Feb. 8, the automaker said.
The recall repair is entirely mechanical. The electronics issues is a red herring be sensationalist media, trying to create a problem where none exists.
This was a mechanical failure. Would have happened even if there were no electronics in the system at all.
But this was a mechanical failure, not an electronic failure.
There is no point in continuing this discussion. You dont believe in brainwashing and you don't believe in mental abuse. Maybe for mindless religious crackpots such as yourself this may be true, but for the rest of us with a brain these are very real.
You claim to be a Christian but poor people can simply rot without receiving needed healthcare, while you refuse to even acknowledge they have a problem, let alone help them.
You think it is perfectly ok to teach children religious dogma and racist bullshit and to justify killing other people - you are sick.
Your arguments are circular and consist on nothing more than stating truisms. It's clear you know nothing about religion, law or the constitution except your own flawed understanding of it, which is more about what you *think* the law should be rather than what it is.
Open your eyes and your mind and really try to understand the world around you - not just the distorted version you learned from your religious cult.
I will pray for your soul and those of your family to hope that you will eventually see a better life, free of the hatred and prejudice that you now have.
Don't bother responding, I refuse to read any more of your drivel.
I took this exam while there and there are several good reasons for the marks to be low
1 - University of Waterloo has one of the best Engineering and Math programs in North America. As such it attracts a lot of foreign students that do not have English as their first language. My Computer Engineering class consisted of approximately 80% first generation or foreign born students. (PS: this is a fact, not intended as a racial slight or a bad thing at all)
2 - The ELPE exam is (when I took it anyway) the first morning after frosh weekend. I was still half plastered when I wrote it and I'm sure many others were too. English skills are not the best at 8am and hung over.
True, but the article IS talking about the ELPE exam at the University of Waterloo, Ontario Canada.
This is ridiculous. I can't believe you advocate brainwashing of children to kill. How Christian of you.
You keep bringing up the amendments (actually you just added to the list) but I dont see how any of that applies to a minimum standard of education:
First - freedonm of religion and speech. Nothing about education.
Fourth - guards against unreasonable searches - nothing about education
Fifth - due process in the judicial suystem - nothing about education
Fourteenth - citizenship, right to vote, and you cannot question the federal debt - nothing about education
So why exactly do any of hte above apply to the discussion of noone being able to impose a minumum standard of education? If you want to make up excuses to keep your children stupid, then go ahead but I really dont see what the problem is.
But those two sentences are incompatible.
Not in the slightest.
So you're stuck. You can think that I should have to conform to a "minimum standard" of education, but constitutionally, you have no way to enforce it, unless you are going to claim that homeschooling itself is evidence of wrongdoing.
That argument makes absolutely ZERO sense.
I am doing a disservice to my kids, and failing my obligations as a parent, to subject my will for what is best for them to the government's will, especially when it has no right to enforce its will in the first place.
This makes no sense. Your point of view is completely without basis.
Your argument is circular: Islam is different than Christianity because they don't believe in Christ. Thats a self evident and pointless distinction.
So because they are your kids, the government can tell you NOTHING about how to raise them.
Correct.
So if you want to pull them out of school and teach them how evolution is evil, or blacks are evil, or Muslims are evil then you should have that right.
Also correct.
But as long as there's a First Amendment, government has no right to say that teaching a child any of those things you described is a violation of that child's rights.
So by your logic, it is perfectly acceptable for certain Muslim children to be brainwashed that America is evil and to be taught how to use a weapon and kill, and that they will be rewarded b y sacrificing their life? This brainwashing is perfectly within their rights according to you since they are only TEACHING the children not actually doing any physical harm to the children or anyone else.
your right to life means you have a right to not have someone else TAKE your life. It means you have a right to DEFEND your life. It does NOT mean that anyone else is obligated to KEEP YOU ALIVE.
You are adding words. the phrase is 'right to life'. Why limit it to taking or defending life? Why do you not see life can also be the ACT of living?
No one is erecting a barricade to you keeping yourself alive. No such barricade exists. You're inventing things that aren't real.
A financial barricade IS a barricade. What is the point of having a right to something if it is effectively unavailable to them?
Biology proves you completely wrong. I chose my words carefully: it is "biologically a distinct and unique human life."
Of course - by definition. And a chicken would be a biologically distinct and unique chicken life. So what?
Like I said, I believe home schooling CAN be a very good thing, and some children will prosper under home schooling vs institution learning. The ONLY thing I asserted is that ALL learning institutions must conform to a minimum standard of care and curriculum for the children. If a parent or teacher or priest want to teach more than that then that is their right. I'm talking about a minimum acceptable standard of teaching. Thats it. I don't see why you are opposed to such a thing.
If you knew much about modern evangelical Protestant Christianity, you would know that it considers itself to be nothing more than Judaism + Christ.
Umm but that's what ALL Christians believe.
Many of this faith believe that Jewish people will be saved under the Abrahamic covenant, whereas everyone else must be saved under the Messianic covenant.
Arrogance. Concentrate on saving yourself, not others.
You don't know much about religions. Christianity believes that people are justified before God from the sacrifice of God-made-flesh. This is entirely different from Islam,
I don't think you know much about religions, why do you believe Islam is different?
No, he did not. He said that government should be responsible for securing your RIGHT to life, liberty, and property. There's a big difference. Bastiat NEVER would have expressed that government has any obligation to keep you alive, so the answer to your question is "yes, but it does not secure your RIGHT to life."
If its impossible to do your rights have been violated. You may have a right to cross the street but if there is a barricade preventing you to cross, then your rights have been violated.
Clearly you do not equate physical abuse with mental abuse. Talk with some women who have been mentally abused by their husbands by condescending and derogatory statements, swearing and yelling, and see if no harm has ever come to them.
Until a fetus has a functioning brain, it is not sentient - alive yes but not sentient. It is no more different than my thumb or fingernail.
If you think sentient life begins at conception (two cells) and should be protected, then all life should be protected - especially since they are more sentient like an ant for example.
This view of yours ... it actually sounds a lot like a religion itself. And you assert it's right, and that those who disagree with it are wrong.
No. I do not have the arrogance to push my beliefs on anyone elses. As for other beliefs, I listen to what they believe and augment my own if I think it makes sense. I do not pass judgement on anyone elses religious beliefs, since I nor anyone else can positively know the true answer.
You do realize that islam and Christianity all came from Judaism? They all share a common 'old testament' for the lack of a better world?
ALL religions are talking about the same basic beliefs. There is no right or wrong when everyone is talking about the same thing but in different languages.
I had a wacom on my tablet (Motion Computing). Was pressure sensitive and cost less than $2000
A company claims it has the technology to make writing on touchscreens more like writing with pencil and paper, when the harder you press the thicker the line you produce.
Anyways, for what it's worth, I find the monkey's story selection has been consistently good - interesting and relevant
Except the capability in the article (quoted above) I had on my tablet from 5 years ago. Press harder on hte stylus and you get a thicker line. Why exactly is this new or fascinating?
Well, he could dedicate even more power from the system into folding@home
I doubt you would see any difference in processing power.
or maybe use it as an extended media center
How is that different from what the PS3 can already do?
Is your imagination that limited?
Yours seems to be if thats all you can come up with..
There is no "right religion" to choose
False. Of course there is.
FALSE - there is no such thing as a 'right religion'. To say so implies there is a 'wrong' religion. With so many religions in the world what are the odds you were born into the 'right' one? What constitutes a 'right' religion? Did God himself come down and announce on TV 'Hey everyone, the Purple Striped Lamb of God followers in northern New Zealand got it right. The rest of you all should have known better and are going to hell'.
The world will be a lot better place to live when everyone realizes that there is no such thing as 'my god' and 'your god'. Everyone is really talking about the exact same thing, with the interpretations diverging because people push what they want to believe into the religion.
Want to kill someone? There's a bible or koran verse to justify that. Be vegetarian? Yup. Eat animals? Yup. Hate gays? Yup. Love everyone? Yup. Beat your children? Yup.
If people stop reading what they want to in the message and actually LISTEN to the message, we'd all just get along.
A fetus, which is biologically a distinct and unique human life.
It's only a fetus after 10 weeks. Before that it is an embryo.
I call it what people have called it for millennia: a child in the womb.
Actually it probably wasn't mentioned much. And in the first trimester the woman probably never realized she was pregnant. Before the 1500s, how life develops in the womb wasn't much understood at all.
who is GOVERNMENT to tell me I have to follow ITS rules for MY kids?
So because they are your kids, the government can tell you NOTHING about how to raise them. So if you want to pull them out of school and teach them how evolution is evil, or blacks are evil, or Muslims are evil then you should have that right. And if you want to sexually abuse them and smack them around at your own will then thats solely your business too and the government has no right to interfere.
Free does not mean absolute freedom to do anything you wish as any time.
As long as they are not causing harm to someone else, they ARE free to do anything they like
Really? Try driving around without a seatbelt. Try being naked in your own backyard.
Great. Now all you have to do is demonstrate that Christianity is a lie.
Who the hell said anything about Christianity being a lie?
But what we are talking about is your so called right to teach your children anything you like without the state being able to impose any minimum standard of a curriculum. I would say this is inherently harmful to the child, along the lines of sexual or mental abuse.
Instead of school lets say you wanted to teach your child to drive a car - perfectly legal and acceptable., However that child still must demonstrate a certain amount of competence via a government run standardized exam. You cannot state 'I taught my child the way I want her to drive an you have no right to impose any regulations on it!' It's clearly ludicrous. Isn't education more important than learning how to drive? So why should\n't there be a minimum standard?
And again, universal health care -- when forced by government -- IS socialist. By definition.
You clearly want to discuss that too. Clearly you dont know or understand the difference between a social program and socialism. You bring up forced by the government as a criteria. So would the legal system be socialist since it is government forced and you are not allowed to go buy your own judge? How about the public school system? What about government paid roads and highways? Government imposed taxes? The military?
Why are those examples of government run social programs not socialist but healthcare is?
Bastiat promoted that the government should be responsible for defending an individuals life, liberty and property. Does not universal healthcare help defend someones life? For many who cannot afford doctors they would die without this program. So basically he is advocating for a social healthcare system.
The US has the best healthcare in the world - for the 5% of the population that can actually afford it.