DAMN IT. I've had mod points rewarded to me twice in a row over the last week or so and I finally find a post with a poor mod rating that I'd like to mod up. The increased efficiency in terms of land and resources used for hemp paper versus tree paper is huge. On top of that, for all you puritans out there, it is well within our means today to grow strands that contain virtually almost no THC making the worry over individuals getting high off the crop non existent.
While I get the idea of putting the dirty work no one wants to do off on the intern it's really a shame that it discourages people from going into medical research. Maybe these companies should look towards their future rather than the comfort level of their current employees (in terms of pawning off the shit jobs on interns).
So who wants to agree with me that Slashdot's April Fools was way more of an annoyance than it was anything positive. I visit news sites for news. If i wanted mock news I'd go to the Onion (which is great).
Your signature "Universal health care is a good thing. It's not socialist. Get over it." is just plane incorrect. While I'm a fan of universal health care I don't understand how one can not refer to it as socialism when it is the very definition of socialism. Are you being facetious and it just went over my head?
What's the interest in Star Wars movies anyway? Star Wars in general mixes mostly Holy Roman Empire time with the arenas, races and idea behind jedi's with future living in space.
You seem to be mixing the Holy Roman Empire up with the Roman Empire as the Holy Roman Empire was most certainly not known for arenas and racing. As for the "and idea behind jedi's with future living in space.", I believe you're referring to the Jedi's being roughly equivalent to medieval knights in space. A more apt comparison would be with Arthurian legend as real knights, like those who were active in the Holy Roman Empire, don't have much in common with Star Wars Jedi aside from the sword play.
The video you're referencing is pure sensationalism. The Fox news casters go out of their way to imply an anti Ron Paul conspiracy when clearly these people were concerned that said individual was transporting drug money (hence the repeated references to the DEA while the Fox news casters make no reference to it). While not in itself a crime, moving large sums of cash across state borders in this modern age is certainly suspicious.
I am fairly certain that if he had just stated that he was carrying Ron Paul tshirt money he'd be fine.
I find it incredibly unlikely that politicians had anything to do with this directly. It sounds more like a bureaucratic mistake or an unintentional loophole. Using this event as a rationale for means of generalizing about politicians seems kind of silly to me.
My only problem with this is that it would seem that they would have to require an active internet connection for playing the game. What if I want to play a game on my laptop while traveling or what if my internet connection is down at home?
Seriously? I hope this is an ad targeted at Frenchmen (he obviously speaks natively some Latin based language) who are thoroughly unimpressive while speaking English. I hope this is a large and affluent market for Dell to tap into otherwise I don't understand......Oh jesus...
Did the native English speaker just refer to this laptop as an aphrodisiac!?
The thing that makes me the most angry is that the person who approved this little gem probably makes more money than me. I just hope the person in charge of making it doesn't (but sadly I think they might)
OK, seriously, how the hell is forcing some one to run off a cliff in a game different from doing damage to them? All you have figured out is how to waste what was probably a substantial amount of time in figuring out how to do a very large amount of indirect damage to some one under absurdly specific conditions. What does this have to do with anything?
This really just seems to be just bad science to me. For starters, just asking people what they like more as they did in the 2,500 person study is no way to determine anything like this. Next, the sample size is entirely too small on the game play tests for them to mean anything. Finally, why on earth are they using a sample group that is disproportionately female in a study about game violence when it is males that a)generally spend far more time playing games and b) are generally more attracted to violence?
Now just as a disclaimer, I'm not promoting any viewpoint in regards to video game violence. I just think the studies in question here are bullshit (at least as they are described in the article).
I don't see how this is necessarily a better system (or worse for that matter) given that state reps and governors are often beholden to special interests. What's to stop them from appointing Senators on the basis of who will cater to said special interests. I mean just this resent fiasco with the governor of Illinois appointing Obama's successor is indication enough that leaving the selection of such an important position as Senator to party elites can be risky. Of course direct election of Senators has its own problems as you suggest in your post above so really all I'm saying is that I don't think either system is superior.
They may have warned against it becoming bipartisan but it quickly became so within a few years of the Republic's founding. The founder fathers were naive to think that political parties were something avoidable in a free, Republican form of government. It's only natural that people will group together with others of like ideology to empower their own agenda.
Yeah lets not support a company that's part of the solution for excessive advertising. That makes sense...
It's possible that a large part of the population has a low threshold of hypnotic suggestion and is susceptible to advertising, but this is a good reason to discourage it.
Huh, what? Currently advertisements are the only real means TV content creators have for making money. Are you saying that those who make the TV you enjoy should not be paid for their efforts?
In any case I'm not ruining anything "for the rest of us" since I wouldn't watch advertisements even if my eyelids were held open, and any that I've accidentally seen have given me a strong aversion to the product advertised.
Yes you are if you are editing out their advertisements. If too many people start doing this then advertisers pull their support for the sight and Hulu loses the ability to pay for the bandwidth you are greedily sucking up. You're basically advocating theft here, from those who make the shows that you enjoy.
Plus if you think you're not effected by advertising you are horribly naive.
Really everything would be fine if content creators would accept more modest profits. Maybe a 100% inheritance tax would help.
Ummm, that's what Hulu is. It's clearly TV show creators taking smaller profits. As for the inheritance tax comment, what the hell are you going on about? That has nothing to do with this.
Wow, what else do you see with your magical crystal ball of seeing into the future? All I see is a TV service that is finally putting forth a reasonable number of ads. If they change their policies I will change my opinion of them but I am not going to try to screw them over because some crazy person thinks they know what they'll do in the future.
What's with your signature? It links directly to a PayPal donation link with no description as to what group I would be donating to. Seems like a dumb way to solicit donations as I have no inclination to donate to an unknown group nor any inclination to research a group so poorly presented.
Honestly I'm kind of bummed that these work-arounds to sites like Hulu exist. Finally I have a means of watching TV where i don't feel like I am wasting too much of my life on commercials while those that make the shows that I enjoy are able to make some money. Now that we're seeing a move back towards a reasonable level of advertising for TV we've got people abusing the system to the ultimate determent of us all.
I like the fact that I can honestly watch these shows without watching 8 - 9 minutes of commercials for every 21 - 22 minutes of show. It's really disappointing to find out that there are those that are actively ruining this for the rest of us because they can't be bothered with 2 - 3 30 second advertisements so that those who make the TV we like can make a bit of money.
I don't understand your reasoning here. How is the state court nullifying the amendment different then the federal court nullifying it? Why should it matter whether it is the federal or state court that nullifies an amendment?
That's ridiculous. So if the state of Oregon amends their constitution to advocate the killing of Jews the courts don't have the ability to change that? That's not true at all. The courts have every right to change a states constitution. How you got modded 5 informative is beyond me.
I think the difference in interface is huge and creates a big difference in game play between Herzog and Dune 2. Dune 2 has a much greater resemblance to the most successful war/base building RTS games of today then Herzog has to Dune 2.
Slashdot Mirror
DAMN IT. I've had mod points rewarded to me twice in a row over the last week or so and I finally find a post with a poor mod rating that I'd like to mod up. The increased efficiency in terms of land and resources used for hemp paper versus tree paper is huge. On top of that, for all you puritans out there, it is well within our means today to grow strands that contain virtually almost no THC making the worry over individuals getting high off the crop non existent.
Random Fact: No one cares.
While I get the idea of putting the dirty work no one wants to do off on the intern it's really a shame that it discourages people from going into medical research. Maybe these companies should look towards their future rather than the comfort level of their current employees (in terms of pawning off the shit jobs on interns).
So who wants to agree with me that Slashdot's April Fools was way more of an annoyance than it was anything positive. I visit news sites for news. If i wanted mock news I'd go to the Onion (which is great).
Your signature "Universal health care is a good thing. It's not socialist. Get over it." is just plane incorrect. While I'm a fan of universal health care I don't understand how one can not refer to it as socialism when it is the very definition of socialism. Are you being facetious and it just went over my head?
What's the interest in Star Wars movies anyway? Star Wars in general mixes mostly Holy Roman Empire time with the arenas, races and idea behind jedi's with future living in space.
You seem to be mixing the Holy Roman Empire up with the Roman Empire as the Holy Roman Empire was most certainly not known for arenas and racing. As for the "and idea behind jedi's with future living in space.", I believe you're referring to the Jedi's being roughly equivalent to medieval knights in space. A more apt comparison would be with Arthurian legend as real knights, like those who were active in the Holy Roman Empire, don't have much in common with Star Wars Jedi aside from the sword play.
We don't really live like that, do we?
That's the whole point of fiction...
The video you're referencing is pure sensationalism. The Fox news casters go out of their way to imply an anti Ron Paul conspiracy when clearly these people were concerned that said individual was transporting drug money (hence the repeated references to the DEA while the Fox news casters make no reference to it). While not in itself a crime, moving large sums of cash across state borders in this modern age is certainly suspicious.
I am fairly certain that if he had just stated that he was carrying Ron Paul tshirt money he'd be fine.
I find it incredibly unlikely that politicians had anything to do with this directly. It sounds more like a bureaucratic mistake or an unintentional loophole.
Using this event as a rationale for means of generalizing about politicians seems kind of silly to me.
My only problem with this is that it would seem that they would have to require an active internet connection for playing the game. What if I want to play a game on my laptop while traveling or what if my internet connection is down at home?
There were some posts about eating Obama poop a bit ago that also had some racist crap in it. I wonder if there's a link?
Seriously? I hope this is an ad targeted at Frenchmen (he obviously speaks natively some Latin based language) who are thoroughly unimpressive while speaking English. I hope this is a large and affluent market for Dell to tap into otherwise I don't understand... ...Oh jesus...
Did the native English speaker just refer to this laptop as an aphrodisiac!?
The thing that makes me the most angry is that the person who approved this little gem probably makes more money than me. I just hope the person in charge of making it doesn't (but sadly I think they might)
What in gods name...
OK, seriously, how the hell is forcing some one to run off a cliff in a game different from doing damage to them? All you have figured out is how to waste what was probably a substantial amount of time in figuring out how to do a very large amount of indirect damage to some one under absurdly specific conditions. What does this have to do with anything?
This really just seems to be just bad science to me. For starters, just asking people what they like more as they did in the 2,500 person study is no way to determine anything like this. Next, the sample size is entirely too small on the game play tests for them to mean anything. Finally, why on earth are they using a sample group that is disproportionately female in a study about game violence when it is males that a)generally spend far more time playing games and b) are generally more attracted to violence?
Now just as a disclaimer, I'm not promoting any viewpoint in regards to video game violence. I just think the studies in question here are bullshit (at least as they are described in the article).
Geez, all you had to do is read the rest of the article summary.
This would only go into affect after enough states totaling 270 electoral votes (enough to elect a president) adopted similar resolutions.
With 270 electoral votes worth of states doing this as well I don't think their votes would be wasted.
I don't see how this is necessarily a better system (or worse for that matter) given that state reps and governors are often beholden to special interests. What's to stop them from appointing Senators on the basis of who will cater to said special interests. I mean just this resent fiasco with the governor of Illinois appointing Obama's successor is indication enough that leaving the selection of such an important position as Senator to party elites can be risky. Of course direct election of Senators has its own problems as you suggest in your post above so really all I'm saying is that I don't think either system is superior.
They may have warned against it becoming bipartisan but it quickly became so within a few years of the Republic's founding. The founder fathers were naive to think that political parties were something avoidable in a free, Republican form of government. It's only natural that people will group together with others of like ideology to empower their own agenda.
Why should I bother?
Yeah lets not support a company that's part of the solution for excessive advertising. That makes sense...
It's possible that a large part of the population has a low threshold of hypnotic suggestion and is susceptible to advertising, but this is a good reason to discourage it.
Huh, what? Currently advertisements are the only real means TV content creators have for making money. Are you saying that those who make the TV you enjoy should not be paid for their efforts?
In any case I'm not ruining anything "for the rest of us" since I wouldn't watch advertisements even if my eyelids were held open, and any that I've accidentally seen have given me a strong aversion to the product advertised.
Yes you are if you are editing out their advertisements. If too many people start doing this then advertisers pull their support for the sight and Hulu loses the ability to pay for the bandwidth you are greedily sucking up. You're basically advocating theft here, from those who make the shows that you enjoy.
Plus if you think you're not effected by advertising you are horribly naive.
Really everything would be fine if content creators would accept more modest profits. Maybe a 100% inheritance tax would help.
Ummm, that's what Hulu is. It's clearly TV show creators taking smaller profits. As for the inheritance tax comment, what the hell are you going on about? That has nothing to do with this.
Wow, what else do you see with your magical crystal ball of seeing into the future? All I see is a TV service that is finally putting forth a reasonable number of ads. If they change their policies I will change my opinion of them but I am not going to try to screw them over because some crazy person thinks they know what they'll do in the future.
Yes but there is absolutely no description of what the case is about. For all I know the RIAA is completely in the right on this particular case.
What's with your signature? It links directly to a PayPal donation link with no description as to what group I would be donating to. Seems like a dumb way to solicit donations as I have no inclination to donate to an unknown group nor any inclination to research a group so poorly presented.
Honestly I'm kind of bummed that these work-arounds to sites like Hulu exist. Finally I have a means of watching TV where i don't feel like I am wasting too much of my life on commercials while those that make the shows that I enjoy are able to make some money. Now that we're seeing a move back towards a reasonable level of advertising for TV we've got people abusing the system to the ultimate determent of us all.
I like the fact that I can honestly watch these shows without watching 8 - 9 minutes of commercials for every 21 - 22 minutes of show. It's really disappointing to find out that there are those that are actively ruining this for the rest of us because they can't be bothered with 2 - 3 30 second advertisements so that those who make the TV we like can make a bit of money.
wow, way to justify your job with a fluff piece and get it on slashdot no less.
I don't understand your reasoning here. How is the state court nullifying the amendment different then the federal court nullifying it? Why should it matter whether it is the federal or state court that nullifies an amendment?
That's ridiculous. So if the state of Oregon amends their constitution to advocate the killing of Jews the courts don't have the ability to change that? That's not true at all. The courts have every right to change a states constitution. How you got modded 5 informative is beyond me.
I think the difference in interface is huge and creates a big difference in game play between Herzog and Dune 2. Dune 2 has a much greater resemblance to the most successful war/base building RTS games of today then Herzog has to Dune 2.