Might as well use all available technology to stop them destroying our cars/property.
So you agree we should continue the dumbing down of society? How about we penalize people who hit your car instead? Money talks and if someone keeps getting dinged for several hundred dollars every time they hit a car they will change. They'll whine and scream and rant and rave, but they will change.
If we'd do the same to the smokers, the obese, alcoholics and drug users, health care wouldn't be so expensive, but that's another story.
ignored the Rochester burbs altogether (ranked third by population) since it is HQ of Frontier.
So much for competition, right?
I have said since the beginning, Verizon and Comcast, and others, are colluding to keep prices high and service slow by not honestly competing with each other. This is exactly what I am referring to.
Which is why we as a society need to come up with a way of offering training and education to those displaced workers, at no cost to the displaced workers.
We do. It's called job retraining and is touted, mainly, by the Republicans who offer it up every time the other side talks about shipping jobs overseas and what about the workers who won't have jobs. Guess what, itdoesn'twork. And still doesn't.
Hey now, let's not let facts get in the way. This article uses the same flawed logic as Rick Perry when he says under his Governorship he's created thousands of jobs without telling you roughly 90% are minimum wage jobs.
CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and the BBC all have big, front page pictures and caption for this story.
The lone holdout? The Fox tabloid with a small banner above their big story asking the question: Can We Do Without It with graphics for HUD, Ed. Dept, IRS and NASA.
saying I am old enough to drink alcohol and use it that way, that's a victimless crime.
Until you kill someone because you got drunk at the bar or purchased from a distributor which wouldn't have happened if you hadn't used a fake ID.
Also, using a fake ID as you described might be considered fraudulent use for purpose of establishing a false identification but definitely using a fake ID is a crime.
So using the above, you've committed 2 crimes: false identification and depending on how it is phrased in your state, vehicular homicide, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide while driving under the influence, negligent homicide and several other variations:
True, but the tone of the comment, when looked at in its entirety, was one of, "Only professionals should be using this stuff," meaning the OP doesn't believe non-professionals should be allowed to use the equipment.
I try not to do what you said but I do make exceptions. Such as this one.
I suspect you might want to actually learn something about the device you're using and how to deploy it.
What does filling out information on a web page have to do with using a device? It doesn't except for the fact one has to fill out the information to use the device.
Expect Apple doesn't force you to upgrade your iOS, and you can downgrade for a limited time frame, and could have restored from a previous backup.
I received a new phone today which is running iOS 7. There is no way for me to put 6.xx on the phone so it can be used now. Thus, Apple is forcing an upgrade.
and could have restored from a previous backup.
As stated above, it's a new phone so no backup. Further, for security reasons, we don't use iCloud on any of our phones.
But go on being shitty IT.
Sounds like I know what I'm talking about and you don't. So who's the shitty IT now?
At this point dSLRs should only be used by professionals,
Thank you for pointing out your beliefs that only certain people should be able to use certain products. I guess your opinion is also that only those who drive for a professional living should be allowed to buy a Porsche or those who make their living from cooking should be allowed to buy $300 knives.
Apparently it's your belief people shouldn't be allowed to buy what they want with their own money just because they enjoy a product.
A dSLR camera is useless if no one sees your photos.
Having had to go through the process of creating Apple IDs and using false information*, not to mention the harassment Apple foists upon people who use their phones, and now finding they've automatically shoved out iOS 7 on new phones with no way to downgrade**, all I can say is their user experience just plain sucks.
If you wanted people to choose a title and phone number, why wait until they're installing an app to prevent them from continuing until they provide the information?
If they wanted people to choose 3 security questions, why wait until you're installing an app and not let them bypass that requirement? It's not their phone, it's the end user.
Linus' quote keeps coming back to be more and more true: You don't break userspace.
By their ineptness, Apple has officially become the new Microsoft.
* Have to use false information because these are for corporate use and apparently the 'geniuses' at Apple can't figure out a way to allow for corporate information to be used so I have to input false information to create IDs.
** The security software we use has not yet been approved for iOS 7 and as of today it appears the new phones are shipping with the new OS with no way to go back to the good version.
The cost to society is that those that die early don't keep paying taxes for their lost days.
Which has what to do with this mandate? It's not a tax and their death has no effect on me because I'm still forced to pay my money to a private company, remember? The government doesn't see a penny of this money.
Further, when someone dies early, there is no obligation to society from them. They certainly aren't using the roads any more, don't need military protection, won't collect unemployment if they're laid off, and so on.
Effectively what you're arguing is people need to pay, and pay, and pay, and pay some more, just because. There doesn't need to be a benefit, just so long as they keep paying.
So tell me, how much extra money do you give the government when you pay your taxes? Do you send in a few dollars now and then, above and beyond what you normally pay, to help pay down the debt?
No it doesn't. It absolves people of personal responsibility because no matter what, someone else will be there to pick up the cost.
Smoker? No problem, keep sucking on those cancer sticks because someone else will pay for your medical care. Obese? Those Ho Hos sure do fill you up, don't they? Drug user? Here ya go, keep smoking, injecting and snorting to your heart's content.
This government mandate does absolutely nothing for personal responsibility because no one has to change their ways. You want personal responsibility? Double the cost for those mentioned above and I can guarantee you the medical costs will fall like a stone in a vacuum. As is, no one has to change because someone else gets the tab.
Politicians always say that and always raise taxes.
Except it's not a tax, is it? It's not raising any revenue. What it does do is mandate people buy something and if they don't buy it, the government will forcibly extract the money from your account.
That money does not go to the government but rather to private companies. In other words, the government doesn't see penny one of this money, only private companies do.
Therefore, no revenue raising + money to private companies/= tax.
The fact that health care is forced or not has no bearing on the ethics of letting anybody access health care records, for something you didn't want to.
Yes, it does. The government has already inserted itself in, arguably, the most private of mattes, ones health, so this is just another step on the path.
First the government says, "You must buy this." Then it makes people fill out forms or check a box to say they've bought the product. Finally, they have a government agency check to be sure you're not lying about buying the product and if you are, they invade your private bank account and forcibly extract money from it.
Since you, and others, have already said the above scenario is perfectly fine, the government can intertwine itself into your personal business, there should be no problem with that same government checking how you're using that product so you're not abusing the process. After all, if you're using that product to fuel your drug habit, how is it fair for others to pay for that?
You can't have it both ways. If you say it is the government's duty to make sure people buy a product, and for the government to monitor compliance and punish those who don't comply (this isn't a tax after all), then there should be no problem with that same government checking up on how you're using that product and complying with the rules.
Slashdot Mirror
In light of the importance of this project, the thing is cheap at 600 million
Cheap? You can start an entire company for that amount! Here's what $600 million could buy (from the last Powerball drawing):
$600 million.
For those of you who think people should be forced to give up their money to the "poor unfortunates", here's what $600 million can buy.
For those technologically inclined, you could have bought your own fiber optic network provider.
$600 million for a lousy web page is not cheap.
Might as well use all available technology to stop them destroying our cars/property.
So you agree we should continue the dumbing down of society? How about we penalize people who hit your car instead? Money talks and if someone keeps getting dinged for several hundred dollars every time they hit a car they will change. They'll whine and scream and rant and rave, but they will change.
If we'd do the same to the smokers, the obese, alcoholics and drug users, health care wouldn't be so expensive, but that's another story.
The don't have the people left that can do major R&D.
Nor write printer drivers. All you get now are Universal drivers which are pretty close to worthless.
Exxxcellent!
ignored the Rochester burbs altogether (ranked third by population) since it is HQ of Frontier.
So much for competition, right?
I have said since the beginning, Verizon and Comcast, and others, are colluding to keep prices high and service slow by not honestly competing with each other. This is exactly what I am referring to.
We got rid of the petty dictator Bush so I'm sure we can do the same with the current guy.
No, now companies want people fresh out of college who are seasoned experts who will work long hours for peanuts.
Which is why we as a society need to come up with a way of offering training and education to those displaced workers, at no cost to the displaced workers.
We do. It's called job retraining and is touted, mainly, by the Republicans who offer it up every time the other side talks about shipping jobs overseas and what about the workers who won't have jobs. Guess what, it doesn't work. And still doesn't.
Hey now, let's not let facts get in the way. This article uses the same flawed logic as Rick Perry when he says under his Governorship he's created thousands of jobs without telling you roughly 90% are minimum wage jobs.
You can add to that that she is now dead.
That is what MarketWatch is reporting. I saw elsewhere there was a kid in the car with her but I have not seen corroboration for that point.
I have the screenshot as proof. Or do facts not fit in your world view?
CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC and the BBC all have big, front page pictures and caption for this story.
The lone holdout? The Fox tabloid with a small banner above their big story asking the question: Can We Do Without It with graphics for HUD, Ed. Dept, IRS and NASA.
saying I am old enough to drink alcohol and use it that way, that's a victimless crime.
Until you kill someone because you got drunk at the bar or purchased from a distributor which wouldn't have happened if you hadn't used a fake ID.
Also, using a fake ID as you described might be considered fraudulent use for purpose of establishing a false identification but definitely using a fake ID is a crime.
So using the above, you've committed 2 crimes: false identification and depending on how it is phrased in your state, vehicular homicide, manslaughter, criminally negligent homicide while driving under the influence, negligent homicide and several other variations:
Criminal listings.
the giant hornets are preying on the only plentiful sources of food they have left: humans!!
No, that's the beautiful part. When wintertime rolls around, the hornets simply freeze to death.
or if that was just an excuse to squash an annoying web site.
Yeah, an annoying web site. One which existed solely to buy and sell drugs, underage children for prostitution, murder for hire and related matters.
I guess a murder attempt is just an excuse to get rid of this annoying web site.
True, but the tone of the comment, when looked at in its entirety, was one of, "Only professionals should be using this stuff," meaning the OP doesn't believe non-professionals should be allowed to use the equipment.
I try not to do what you said but I do make exceptions. Such as this one.
I suspect you might want to actually learn something about the device you're using and how to deploy it.
What does filling out information on a web page have to do with using a device? It doesn't except for the fact one has to fill out the information to use the device.
Expect Apple doesn't force you to upgrade your iOS, and you can downgrade for a limited time frame, and could have restored from a previous backup.
I received a new phone today which is running iOS 7. There is no way for me to put 6.xx on the phone so it can be used now. Thus, Apple is forcing an upgrade.
and could have restored from a previous backup.
As stated above, it's a new phone so no backup. Further, for security reasons, we don't use iCloud on any of our phones.
But go on being shitty IT.
Sounds like I know what I'm talking about and you don't. So who's the shitty IT now?
At this point dSLRs should only be used by professionals,
Thank you for pointing out your beliefs that only certain people should be able to use certain products. I guess your opinion is also that only those who drive for a professional living should be allowed to buy a Porsche or those who make their living from cooking should be allowed to buy $300 knives.
Apparently it's your belief people shouldn't be allowed to buy what they want with their own money just because they enjoy a product.
A dSLR camera is useless if no one sees your photos.
Yup, there's the confirmation.,
Having had to go through the process of creating Apple IDs and using false information*, not to mention the harassment Apple foists upon people who use their phones, and now finding they've automatically shoved out iOS 7 on new phones with no way to downgrade**, all I can say is their user experience just plain sucks.
If you wanted people to choose a title and phone number, why wait until they're installing an app to prevent them from continuing until they provide the information?
If they wanted people to choose 3 security questions, why wait until you're installing an app and not let them bypass that requirement? It's not their phone, it's the end user.
Linus' quote keeps coming back to be more and more true: You don't break userspace.
By their ineptness, Apple has officially become the new Microsoft.
* Have to use false information because these are for corporate use and apparently the 'geniuses' at Apple can't figure out a way to allow for corporate information to be used so I have to input false information to create IDs.
** The security software we use has not yet been approved for iOS 7 and as of today it appears the new phones are shipping with the new OS with no way to go back to the good version.
The cost to society is that those that die early don't keep paying taxes for their lost days.
Which has what to do with this mandate? It's not a tax and their death has no effect on me because I'm still forced to pay my money to a private company, remember? The government doesn't see a penny of this money.
Further, when someone dies early, there is no obligation to society from them. They certainly aren't using the roads any more, don't need military protection, won't collect unemployment if they're laid off, and so on.
Effectively what you're arguing is people need to pay, and pay, and pay, and pay some more, just because. There doesn't need to be a benefit, just so long as they keep paying.
So tell me, how much extra money do you give the government when you pay your taxes? Do you send in a few dollars now and then, above and beyond what you normally pay, to help pay down the debt?
It forces a little personal responsibility.
No it doesn't. It absolves people of personal responsibility because no matter what, someone else will be there to pick up the cost.
Smoker? No problem, keep sucking on those cancer sticks because someone else will pay for your medical care. Obese? Those Ho Hos sure do fill you up, don't they? Drug user? Here ya go, keep smoking, injecting and snorting to your heart's content.
This government mandate does absolutely nothing for personal responsibility because no one has to change their ways. You want personal responsibility? Double the cost for those mentioned above and I can guarantee you the medical costs will fall like a stone in a vacuum. As is, no one has to change because someone else gets the tab.
Politicians always say that and always raise taxes.
/= tax.
Except it's not a tax, is it? It's not raising any revenue. What it does do is mandate people buy something and if they don't buy it, the government will forcibly extract the money from your account.
That money does not go to the government but rather to private companies. In other words, the government doesn't see penny one of this money, only private companies do.
Therefore, no revenue raising + money to private companies
(in downtown Philadelphia) . . . thought the person was just some random idiot
That's all you need to know.
Make a prediction. Any prediction.
If you're wrong, no one will remember,
Except if you're Jim Cramer in which case people did, and do, track his predictions so he can't forget and claim otherwise.
If you take notice, there's an awful lot of red on his predictions.
The fact that health care is forced or not has no bearing on the ethics of letting anybody access health care records, for something you didn't want to.
Yes, it does. The government has already inserted itself in, arguably, the most private of mattes, ones health, so this is just another step on the path.
First the government says, "You must buy this." Then it makes people fill out forms or check a box to say they've bought the product. Finally, they have a government agency check to be sure you're not lying about buying the product and if you are, they invade your private bank account and forcibly extract money from it.
Since you, and others, have already said the above scenario is perfectly fine, the government can intertwine itself into your personal business, there should be no problem with that same government checking how you're using that product so you're not abusing the process. After all, if you're using that product to fuel your drug habit, how is it fair for others to pay for that?
You can't have it both ways. If you say it is the government's duty to make sure people buy a product, and for the government to monitor compliance and punish those who don't comply (this isn't a tax after all), then there should be no problem with that same government checking up on how you're using that product and complying with the rules.