I would go for that except that at least here in CA, if you put the electricity back, they don't charge you. They only charge you if you don't return it.
I don't entirely disagree with you, but if you notice the GP was saying that the home visits are not for dealing with agressive breeds. It is for dealing with abused animals. These are the animals that should never be put back in the public at all. We currently get commercials on TV advertising that abused animals are not a problem, and that people should be specifically going out of their way to get abused animals. Specifically they say that the dog isn't bad. The owner is.
I sure wish they would, or more accurately, I wish my city would. I'm tired of see dogs that have walked around in shit, standing on restaurant tables and running around grocery stores. I'm tired of having cat shit all over my yard even though I don't own a cat. I'm tired having people tell me that their dog that haunched up growling at my child is "just saying hi".
Dog owners would be fine if the majority of them were responsible. The problem is that most are not and the problem of irresponsible pet ownership is getting worse.
Letting an abused pit bull to be put anywhere near people is incredibly irresponsible. A dog is like a gun. Some of them are big. Some are small. Some were created for sport, and many were created for protection. Pit bulls were created to kill. Just owning one is like playing with a loaded gun. Owning one that has been abused is like going out in your front yard and firing off a few rounds in the air from your.38. Actually, firing off the rounds from your.38 is less dangerous.
If they want to legislate dogs, they should require stricter licensing on owning dogs. It should be just as hard to get a dog as a gun, and the responsibilities and liabilities should be equivalent.
Yes I do. I also remember when Bill Gates was saying that you shouldn't pirate software because if you did you wouldn't get the manuals or techinical support.
If your nastalgic for the days of yore, you could always get one of the C64 replicas They are a C64 on the outside, a 64bit x86 Atom on the inside, and they come with a manual.
She didn't say she didn't want me to back up the server. She said that she didn't need backups of her computer. Big difference. You don't always need backups. Her laptop doesn't.
That is one thing that really bugs me. They want me to make a restore CD at 5 times the price with a 10 times shorter lifespan over a $0.10 piece of plastic.
That's funny because I was going through and updating the backup system in our house, and asked my wife what she wanted backed up. Her response was "Nothing". She stores everything she wants to keep in a Lotus Notes Database, and that replicates to our server. She was absolutely adamant that she would have no problem if I did a factory reset on her laptop on any random night.
Go figure. I guess sometimes people don't need backups. I just never expected it in my own home.
While she may have had some valid things to say, they were vastly overshadowed by her example where she kept pointing out things that functioned exactly as designed and where no mistakes were made, and claiming that because they were bad for the unwashed masses, that they must have been mistakes.
There is already a market for just as expensive and less powerful systems. Go into any WalMart, Target, or Toys R Us. You will find a dozen or so video game systems that cost between $15-$25. They will have one game hard coded in them, and people keep buying them. Why? Because they are disposable toys, and I doesn't take a huge amount of play for it to have been worth the price. The companies website is right. You CAN lose it and it would be OK. It is only a $10 toy after all.
Hopefully, they won't just stick to hand helds. Give us a unit that plugs into the TV also.
I was just thinking this about my RV the other day. The thing get 8mpg. It also is already carrying around lots of heavy batteries, and it isn't like Motorhomes are cheap. Why have we not seen hybrid Motorhomes? They would be selling to people with the disposable income to pay for it. They would be targeting gas guzzlers, and they would improve the existing usage by using better batteries, and they wouldn't have to add any extra weight, as the things already carry lots of extra batteries.
I think you will find significant correlation between the kids who's parents prevent them from having experiences that let them learn and mature, and immature 21 year olds.
Exactly. The worst child abusers are often like the poster above who like the tortoise wins the race with slow and stead pace. Let your kid stay home while you run to the store, and you might end up in jail. Spend every day for 18 years preventing them from becoming self sufficient, and you get a pat on the back. It truly is disgusting.
And that is why the vast majority of kids are retarded. The kind of vehicle this kid is driving is less dangerous than a bicycle. Heck, it is less dangerous than taking a bus to school.
Are you really arguing against progress? Really? That is the best argument you can muster? Your argument is the equivalent to saying that we should never have added more than 64k to personal computers because we would just keep finding ways to use all of the memory we have.
There is nothing in your post that would clog us back up to 100% capacity. If we got back to 100% capacity it would be with some new amazing functionality that you have not yet even imagined.
As great as they were for their day, I wouldn't want of have been stuck with 1982's computers permanently. By the same token, as great as the internet is today, I don't want to be stuck with 2011's internet permanently.
Slashdot Mirror
I would go for that except that at least here in CA, if you put the electricity back, they don't charge you. They only charge you if you don't return it.
I don't entirely disagree with you, but if you notice the GP was saying that the home visits are not for dealing with agressive breeds. It is for dealing with abused animals. These are the animals that should never be put back in the public at all. We currently get commercials on TV advertising that abused animals are not a problem, and that people should be specifically going out of their way to get abused animals. Specifically they say that the dog isn't bad. The owner is.
Corporations are not capitalist nor are they socialist. They are Feudal.
patents are not ownership. That is just a euphemism. Patents are government mandated monopolies. Closer to fascism than capitalism.
The fact that you would even comment on socialism means you clearly don't understand the parents argument.
I sure wish they would, or more accurately, I wish my city would. I'm tired of see dogs that have walked around in shit, standing on restaurant tables and running around grocery stores. I'm tired of having cat shit all over my yard even though I don't own a cat. I'm tired having people tell me that their dog that haunched up growling at my child is "just saying hi".
Dog owners would be fine if the majority of them were responsible. The problem is that most are not and the problem of irresponsible pet ownership is getting worse.
Letting an abused pit bull to be put anywhere near people is incredibly irresponsible. A dog is like a gun. Some of them are big. Some are small. Some were created for sport, and many were created for protection. Pit bulls were created to kill. Just owning one is like playing with a loaded gun. Owning one that has been abused is like going out in your front yard and firing off a few rounds in the air from your .38. Actually, firing off the rounds from your .38 is less dangerous.
If they want to legislate dogs, they should require stricter licensing on owning dogs. It should be just as hard to get a dog as a gun, and the responsibilities and liabilities should be equivalent.
Yes I do. I also remember when Bill Gates was saying that you shouldn't pirate software because if you did you wouldn't get the manuals or techinical support.
If your nastalgic for the days of yore, you could always get one of the C64 replicas They are a C64 on the outside, a 64bit x86 Atom on the inside, and they come with a manual.
http://www.commodoreusa.net/
The discussion was on backing up HER LAPTOP. Backing up her laptop is not the solution to the server being reset to factory settings.
No, I don't since the system wouldn't run in it's normal mode when the key was inserted.
She didn't say she didn't want me to back up the server. She said that she didn't need backups of her computer. Big difference. You don't always need backups. Her laptop doesn't.
No, I don't. I know that someone will do it, but most people would be in way better shape if they had to insert a key to install an update.
That is one thing that really bugs me. They want me to make a restore CD at 5 times the price with a 10 times shorter lifespan over a $0.10 piece of plastic.
That's funny because I was going through and updating the backup system in our house, and asked my wife what she wanted backed up. Her response was "Nothing". She stores everything she wants to keep in a Lotus Notes Database, and that replicates to our server. She was absolutely adamant that she would have no problem if I did a factory reset on her laptop on any random night. Go figure. I guess sometimes people don't need backups. I just never expected it in my own home.
Yes I have. No it doesn't look like Blu-ray, but with the proper filter, it can be fine. Especially for $20.
While she may have had some valid things to say, they were vastly overshadowed by her example where she kept pointing out things that functioned exactly as designed and where no mistakes were made, and claiming that because they were bad for the unwashed masses, that they must have been mistakes.
Her basic premise was a mistake.
There is already a market for just as expensive and less powerful systems. Go into any WalMart, Target, or Toys R Us. You will find a dozen or so video game systems that cost between $15-$25. They will have one game hard coded in them, and people keep buying them. Why? Because they are disposable toys, and I doesn't take a huge amount of play for it to have been worth the price. The companies website is right. You CAN lose it and it would be OK. It is only a $10 toy after all.
Hopefully, they won't just stick to hand helds. Give us a unit that plugs into the TV also.
Actually in the case of a Macro kernel, the entire OS is the kernel and it is properly referred to as Linux.
I'm pretty sure it isn't.
It's GPL. That means that as long as I make the source code available when I release it, it is properly called anything I want it to be called.
So, there is no such thing as a car then?
I was just thinking this about my RV the other day. The thing get 8mpg. It also is already carrying around lots of heavy batteries, and it isn't like Motorhomes are cheap. Why have we not seen hybrid Motorhomes? They would be selling to people with the disposable income to pay for it. They would be targeting gas guzzlers, and they would improve the existing usage by using better batteries, and they wouldn't have to add any extra weight, as the things already carry lots of extra batteries.
I think you will find significant correlation between the kids who's parents prevent them from having experiences that let them learn and mature, and immature 21 year olds.
Exactly. The worst child abusers are often like the poster above who like the tortoise wins the race with slow and stead pace. Let your kid stay home while you run to the store, and you might end up in jail. Spend every day for 18 years preventing them from becoming self sufficient, and you get a pat on the back. It truly is disgusting.
And that is why the vast majority of kids are retarded. The kind of vehicle this kid is driving is less dangerous than a bicycle. Heck, it is less dangerous than taking a bus to school.
If you use the definition of "not dead" as "obese".
And was that a 50" CRT that had twice the resolution? And did that 50" CRT cost you $800?
Are you really arguing against progress? Really? That is the best argument you can muster? Your argument is the equivalent to saying that we should never have added more than 64k to personal computers because we would just keep finding ways to use all of the memory we have.
There is nothing in your post that would clog us back up to 100% capacity. If we got back to 100% capacity it would be with some new amazing functionality that you have not yet even imagined.
As great as they were for their day, I wouldn't want of have been stuck with 1982's computers permanently. By the same token, as great as the internet is today, I don't want to be stuck with 2011's internet permanently.