I figure if Stephen Colbert wanted to make sure he is actually telling the truth on the show, he could always edit his wikipedia article to make it true.
There is no need for a kid to have a fulltime cell phone. Sure, maybe to have on hand for safety reasons, but as for any other purpose, there's no need. Plus, cell phones are only going to add stress to one's life.
The fundamental rights of each individual person shouldn't be up for a vote to be removed.
It's as silly and ridiculous as the concept of writing anti-discrimination laws when the rights to life and LIBERTY are already a given, with liberty being what should be protecting against undue discrimination.
There are things that shouldn't even need to be written into law to protect our fundamental rights. There are also other things that need to be written into law to protect against other laws trying to redefine them. Legal statutes passed by Congress should never override what is written in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. For example, warrantless searches cannot be overrode, despite their attempts to pass less powerful law trying to redefine it.
The virus theory I think is a good theory for some of the spam. Whether creating a bunch of zombies to do one's bidding, or simply putting keyloggers onto their computer to find out their credit card information, it's a win-win (for them) situation if they infect someone.
Re:Only measure against your own goals
on
How Old is Too Old?
·
· Score: 3, Insightful
I happen to agree about the comment you made regarding when someone starts their life. In my opinion, "Age is nothing more than just the number of times you traveled around the Sun."
Actually, Stephen Colbert didn't fry the site. I was able to get onto it hours after it went down. As to why it's down again as I'm typing this up, I have no idea.
Also, I'm a bit surprised no one has tried bringing up the Indian nations in America. America, the swiss cheese country, as I could call it.
To get back on topic, like I said, make Jerusalem it's own country. Let the people physically residing in it make it's own laws. Freedom of religion, of which acts do no harm, would be very important.
There shouldn't be a need to carve up countries to make new nations. They should be able to agree to a fair and democratic government which reflects all the people in a given land.
By the way, I like the idea of Jerusalem becoming it's own nation (kind of like the Vatican is it's own nation). (Not sure if my grammar is correct in the above.)
This isn't lawful, is it? The American government cannot simply give up one of it's own citizens to a foreign country just because he or she committed a crime on the Net. Maybe it if matches an American law, sure, but not a foreign one.
Let me illustrate. Hacking into a website and vandalizing it, that would be illegal in both countries. Posting something on a message board that is physically located on a server in a foreign country which has freedom of speech restrictions, well, although illegal in the foreign country, it wouldn't be illegal in America, and the American government should not give someone up unless it violates a similar American law or violates common law.
The police are there to protect and serve. This did neither. The most I think that could be done to the children would be to charge them with destruction of property. The land owner, which I guess is the city and/or county, would be responsible for a lawsuit against the children for damage to the tree, IF they wish to persue it.
Seeing as the children didn't realize what they are doing is wrong, yes, the police over-reacted. You can tell if someone is knowingly doing something wrong. Spraypainting someone's property; toilet papering a house; riding a bicycling without a helmet through red lights while going the wrong way in traffic; all of those would be examples of knowingly doing something wrong.
I'm glad you bring up that other problem. Farmers should be paid for to grow as much as possible, not the opposite that is done now.
I still stick to my free lunch idea. If there are $50 million or so k-12 students in America, giving each individual school $500 to provide free lunches (limit one per day per student), that'd cost $25 billion per year. If there tends to be 180 days per school year, that's about $2.75 per day.
Schools could consider putting an assortment of fruit out on a table and allowing them to take as many as they please, within reason. If a student wants to take an apple, banana, etc., so be it. This would be paid for by the funding.
Also, they should consider giving a free bottle of water with each meal as opposed to milk or chocolate milk. Water contains no calories, and probably runs around 20 cents or less per bottle.
Alternative good-tasting stuff like gardenburgers.
Sandwich options.
Also, they need to scare students straight by telling them how much fat grams are in some of the popular fast food.
The solution is for schools to serve only health food as determined by a qualified nutritionist. However, states, or better yet, the federal government, needs to throw more money at making school lunches healthier. In fact, why not make it so school lunches are 100% free, limit one per student per day, if all the food there is healthy.
As for soda in schools, charge more (like $1 to $1.25 per 12 oz can). Plus, the caffeine can be beneficial in my opinion.
I agree. A bad sector on a spinning disc drive doesn't ruin the drive. The drive dying ruins the drive, more or less. Well, unless you're going to spend thousands on doing one of those data recovery things.
Solution: Doing a RAID so if a drive does go bad, there's the second drive. Just replace. (I don't know too much about RAID, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
The advantage of flash is what the article says though. Faster O.S. booting. Hybrid drives is a really good idea. Something fast to put the O.S. onto meaning no more 3-5 minute boot-ups for Windows.
They are not secure at all. They are a joke. Someone people are stupid enough to post certain personal information on their blogs or social networking sites. They are not secure in any way or form.
What they need do it is to create a dual password system, where there's a master password which can change anything, and a secondary password which can change anything but the master password. You would always log in using the secondary password. Concerning the master password, write it down, stick it in a very safe place at home provide you trust family members.
I'd like to see the federal House of Representatives doubled. Each district would contain two Representatives. Small states would still have one district, but would have two Representatives. Use the Single Transferable Vote method to determine the two seats, meaning 2/3rds of the district will end up being represented.
I'd like to see states be encouraged to enact laws to do the electoral votes as the following. Use Instant Runoff Voting. The winner of each congressional district determines the electoral vote. The state popular vote determines the senatorial electoral votes, if you know what I mean. A state, such as Washington state, has 11 electoral votes last I checked. Let us say that 5 vote Democratic, and 4 vote Republican, concerning the congressional districts. The popular vote goes Democratic. So the electors will be sworn to vote accordingly, meaning 7 will vote for the Democratic choice and 4 for the Republican choice. This prevents candidates from just trying to tip the balance in a given state, and will force them to deal with more areas. Instead of dealing with 50 places, they'll be dealing with 435.
I think it should be left up to each individual state to determine how they elect their Senators. If a state wants to elect their Senators by their state legislature, so be it. If they want voters to vote on it, so be it. If they want to choose both senators at the same time using STV, with one going for a full term, and another going for a partial term, so be it.
First of all, regardless, I'd like to see the House of Representatives be doubled. Each district would be a two member district, and STV would determine the two seats.
Second of all, how about this for an idea? Use Instant Runoff Voting to determine the winner in each congressional district, making it harder for politicians to pander to the whole state, since states tend to be mixed. (Like Eastern Washington is red, Western Washington is blue. However, since Western Washington has more population, the state tends to go blue with all 11 votes.) The popular vote of the state would determine the two senatorial electoral votes.
So for example, let us say a state has 5 district that vote Democratic, and 4 that vote Republican. However, the total population votes Democratic. That means 7 votes for the Democrat and 4 votes for the Republican. As it would be now, all 11 would go to the Democrat. This makes it a lot harder for a politician to gobble up votes by just tipping it slightly in their favour in given states.
There are some websites which will do worse, which in one part will claim that they will own your material, and will also state that you, the poster, own your material. A conflict in the terms.
The important thing is this. Do you have a right to force them to remove all of your content off their site upon your own request?
Agreed. Someone cannot assign their rights. People have a right to freedom of speech and thought. People have a right to bear arms, which is a form of self-defense (whether against another citizen, or in the worst case scenario, against a tyrannical government). People have a right to a trial by a jury of their peers. No matter what a contract says, I cannot forgo those rights.
Slashdot Mirror
(If I'm reading what you said correctly.)
I figure if Stephen Colbert wanted to make sure he is actually telling the truth on the show, he could always edit his wikipedia article to make it true.
There is no need for a kid to have a fulltime cell phone. Sure, maybe to have on hand for safety reasons, but as for any other purpose, there's no need. Plus, cell phones are only going to add stress to one's life.
I think you're just trolling for angry replies.
The fundamental rights of each individual person shouldn't be up for a vote to be removed.
It's as silly and ridiculous as the concept of writing anti-discrimination laws when the rights to life and LIBERTY are already a given, with liberty being what should be protecting against undue discrimination.
There are things that shouldn't even need to be written into law to protect our fundamental rights. There are also other things that need to be written into law to protect against other laws trying to redefine them. Legal statutes passed by Congress should never override what is written in the Constitution or Bill of Rights. For example, warrantless searches cannot be overrode, despite their attempts to pass less powerful law trying to redefine it.
I guess I can pity those who are trading their civil liberties for security. Those type of people aren't going to fight when "it" happens to them.
By "it", I mean various things. One example would be getting thrown in jail with never being charged.
I am not willing to trade my constitutional rights and other civil liberties in exchange for security.
The virus theory I think is a good theory for some of the spam. Whether creating a bunch of zombies to do one's bidding, or simply putting keyloggers onto their computer to find out their credit card information, it's a win-win (for them) situation if they infect someone.
I happen to agree about the comment you made regarding when someone starts their life. In my opinion, "Age is nothing more than just the number of times you traveled around the Sun."
Actually, Stephen Colbert didn't fry the site. I was able to get onto it hours after it went down. As to why it's down again as I'm typing this up, I have no idea.
Just a comment. I wonder what it would feel like to be in an earthquake while sleeping in one of these beds.
I think Anomymizer.com is an American company. Any chance that they could get in trouble for this? http://www.anonymizer.com/consumer/media/press_rel eases/03312006.html
Please read that article involving what they are doing in China.
Not many know it that Vatican City is a country.s /vt.html
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geo
They even have their own country code.
http://www.va/
Also, I'm a bit surprised no one has tried bringing up the Indian nations in America. America, the swiss cheese country, as I could call it.
To get back on topic, like I said, make Jerusalem it's own country. Let the people physically residing in it make it's own laws. Freedom of religion, of which acts do no harm, would be very important.
There shouldn't be a need to carve up countries to make new nations. They should be able to agree to a fair and democratic government which reflects all the people in a given land.
By the way, I like the idea of Jerusalem becoming it's own nation (kind of like the Vatican is it's own nation). (Not sure if my grammar is correct in the above.)
This isn't lawful, is it? The American government cannot simply give up one of it's own citizens to a foreign country just because he or she committed a crime on the Net. Maybe it if matches an American law, sure, but not a foreign one.
Let me illustrate. Hacking into a website and vandalizing it, that would be illegal in both countries. Posting something on a message board that is physically located on a server in a foreign country which has freedom of speech restrictions, well, although illegal in the foreign country, it wouldn't be illegal in America, and the American government should not give someone up unless it violates a similar American law or violates common law.
The police are there to protect and serve. This did neither. The most I think that could be done to the children would be to charge them with destruction of property. The land owner, which I guess is the city and/or county, would be responsible for a lawsuit against the children for damage to the tree, IF they wish to persue it.
Seeing as the children didn't realize what they are doing is wrong, yes, the police over-reacted. You can tell if someone is knowingly doing something wrong. Spraypainting someone's property; toilet papering a house; riding a bicycling without a helmet through red lights while going the wrong way in traffic; all of those would be examples of knowingly doing something wrong.
I'm glad you bring up that other problem. Farmers should be paid for to grow as much as possible, not the opposite that is done now.
I still stick to my free lunch idea. If there are $50 million or so k-12 students in America, giving each individual school $500 to provide free lunches (limit one per day per student), that'd cost $25 billion per year. If there tends to be 180 days per school year, that's about $2.75 per day.
Schools could consider putting an assortment of fruit out on a table and allowing them to take as many as they please, within reason. If a student wants to take an apple, banana, etc., so be it. This would be paid for by the funding.
Also, they should consider giving a free bottle of water with each meal as opposed to milk or chocolate milk. Water contains no calories, and probably runs around 20 cents or less per bottle.
Alternative good-tasting stuff like gardenburgers.
Sandwich options.
Also, they need to scare students straight by telling them how much fat grams are in some of the popular fast food.
The solution is for schools to serve only health food as determined by a qualified nutritionist. However, states, or better yet, the federal government, needs to throw more money at making school lunches healthier. In fact, why not make it so school lunches are 100% free, limit one per student per day, if all the food there is healthy.
As for soda in schools, charge more (like $1 to $1.25 per 12 oz can). Plus, the caffeine can be beneficial in my opinion.
I agree. A bad sector on a spinning disc drive doesn't ruin the drive. The drive dying ruins the drive, more or less. Well, unless you're going to spend thousands on doing one of those data recovery things.
Solution: Doing a RAID so if a drive does go bad, there's the second drive. Just replace. (I don't know too much about RAID, so correct me if I'm wrong.)
The advantage of flash is what the article says though. Faster O.S. booting. Hybrid drives is a really good idea. Something fast to put the O.S. onto meaning no more 3-5 minute boot-ups for Windows.
If EVERYONE refused to comply with such absurd rules when purchasing stuff at stores, the stores would lose business.
They are not secure at all. They are a joke. Someone people are stupid enough to post certain personal information on their blogs or social networking sites. They are not secure in any way or form.
What they need do it is to create a dual password system, where there's a master password which can change anything, and a secondary password which can change anything but the master password. You would always log in using the secondary password. Concerning the master password, write it down, stick it in a very safe place at home provide you trust family members.
I agree with some of the stuff you said.
I'd like to see the federal House of Representatives doubled. Each district would contain two Representatives. Small states would still have one district, but would have two Representatives. Use the Single Transferable Vote method to determine the two seats, meaning 2/3rds of the district will end up being represented.
I'd like to see states be encouraged to enact laws to do the electoral votes as the following. Use Instant Runoff Voting. The winner of each congressional district determines the electoral vote. The state popular vote determines the senatorial electoral votes, if you know what I mean. A state, such as Washington state, has 11 electoral votes last I checked. Let us say that 5 vote Democratic, and 4 vote Republican, concerning the congressional districts. The popular vote goes Democratic. So the electors will be sworn to vote accordingly, meaning 7 will vote for the Democratic choice and 4 for the Republican choice. This prevents candidates from just trying to tip the balance in a given state, and will force them to deal with more areas. Instead of dealing with 50 places, they'll be dealing with 435.
I think it should be left up to each individual state to determine how they elect their Senators. If a state wants to elect their Senators by their state legislature, so be it. If they want voters to vote on it, so be it. If they want to choose both senators at the same time using STV, with one going for a full term, and another going for a partial term, so be it.
First of all, regardless, I'd like to see the House of Representatives be doubled. Each district would be a two member district, and STV would determine the two seats.
Second of all, how about this for an idea? Use Instant Runoff Voting to determine the winner in each congressional district, making it harder for politicians to pander to the whole state, since states tend to be mixed. (Like Eastern Washington is red, Western Washington is blue. However, since Western Washington has more population, the state tends to go blue with all 11 votes.) The popular vote of the state would determine the two senatorial electoral votes.
So for example, let us say a state has 5 district that vote Democratic, and 4 that vote Republican. However, the total population votes Democratic. That means 7 votes for the Democrat and 4 votes for the Republican. As it would be now, all 11 would go to the Democrat. This makes it a lot harder for a politician to gobble up votes by just tipping it slightly in their favour in given states.
We all remember http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/2 5/2227215 from back in 2005, right?
There are some websites which will do worse, which in one part will claim that they will own your material, and will also state that you, the poster, own your material. A conflict in the terms.
The important thing is this. Do you have a right to force them to remove all of your content off their site upon your own request?
Agreed. Someone cannot assign their rights. People have a right to freedom of speech and thought. People have a right to bear arms, which is a form of self-defense (whether against another citizen, or in the worst case scenario, against a tyrannical government). People have a right to a trial by a jury of their peers. No matter what a contract says, I cannot forgo those rights.