How is saying someone that smokes should be responsible for their own actions? How is saying getting drunk every weekend is irresponsible?
Are you asking me or are you being rhetorical?
Those aren't generalizations. Those are facts. We know the effects of smoking and constantly drinking too much. We know what happens when you shoot heroin or smoke crack.
That's not the generalization I was referring to. Yes, we have an understanding of the chemistry involved.
People chose to do those things. No one forced them. It is irresponsible, despite all the evidence, to keep doing something which is known to produce issues at some point.
I contend that irresponsibility is not the only reason. That is your generalization. Chronic abuse, and use, are two different ball games.
And no, I shouldn't have to keep quiet when I'm the one who gets penalized for other people being irresponsible. You want to smoke? Fine. Just don't expect me to pay to have your lung removed or undergo cancer treatment because of your choice.
I don't expect you to. Like you wouldn't expect me to if you broke your leg skiing, or kayaking, or any other activity that has potential for injury. This is what a civilized healthcare system is for.
It's funny how people seem to think they can do what they want without any repercussions, the liberal/libertarian viewpoint generally espoused here, yet somehow, despite them wanting to do what they want, these same people seem to think I need to be their caretaker when their choices land them in trouble.
What are you blathering about? "Seem" seems to be the key-word here, and it only seems that way because you're relying on your bad assumptions. I'm neither "Liberal" nor "Libertarian" nor "Insert your stereotype here". I am a thinking, learning, adapting human being. As such, this view-point can only be mine. If some conservatives, liberals or libertarians (I don't know anyone that would fit into any of these molds to any significant degree) agree, then it's a happy coincidence. So please, keep your enlightenment about what I should do to yourself.
You get panned because you generalize. Each of the activities has a potential for irresponsibility, non of them mean the person is irresponsible. Labeling them as such is insulting. I suggest that you point it out to yourself, keep it to yourself, and stop throwing labels around at strangers who do not know who you are, or why they should listen to you.
Yes, he had a stroke. But that's hardly the reason. It may have something to do with the world-wide state of medicine in the early 20th century. You wouldn't have more of a chance after a stroke regardless of where you were at the time.
1) Your payscale doesn't reflect you
2) Your payscale is often corelated to your personality (the qualifier 'most' is part of the quoted text in your post)
I guess it's too much to ask that you realize that corelation is not causation without having it spelled out for you.
At any rate, the post is typical of a grammar nazi. Entierly missing the point of the message only to pick on some minor linguistic inconsistency and failing to realize the original author couldn't give less of a shit.
You've missed the forest for the trees. Yes, Javascript was concieved as a client-side language. So it is a bit backwards to a lot of us to see it run on the server. Especially since the server isn't really lacking in a choice of language. Also, I've only seen amatures claim that it isn't a real language, professionals tend to use it liberaly when dealing with UX (it's the right tool for that job). The problem with amatures writing it is not them writing it, it's us maintaining it. Getting something out the door is simple, if you're never going to improve on it. That's hardly ever the case though. As soon as something is out, there is usually a 2.0 version in the back of someone's head. It's far more difficult to mold the existing steaming pile into a different one than coming up with the different one from scratch. The inconsistency is really only in your perception.
I find myself in the same boat. I doubt it's about ego at this point. I know what I cannot do. But as far as time estimates go, I'm consistantly and spectacularly off. No amount of humility seemed to have ever helped.
While they require a viewing public, that is basically an endless stream. They can absorb most of the backlash and not even notice. Once they are hit with reduced revenew, they notice. It's not that hard to see why we are second rate to them.
Slashdot Mirror
Might land you on a watch list though.
We are omnivores.
Not in US, but I vote "no confidence".
Should clarify. I'm not in a position to do any of those things, Sorry.
I can't do any of those things. Sorry.
Are you asking me or are you being rhetorical?
That's not the generalization I was referring to. Yes, we have an understanding of the chemistry involved.
I contend that irresponsibility is not the only reason. That is your generalization. Chronic abuse, and use, are two different ball games.
I don't expect you to. Like you wouldn't expect me to if you broke your leg skiing, or kayaking, or any other activity that has potential for injury. This is what a civilized healthcare system is for.
What are you blathering about? "Seem" seems to be the key-word here, and it only seems that way because you're relying on your bad assumptions. I'm neither "Liberal" nor "Libertarian" nor "Insert your stereotype here". I am a thinking, learning, adapting human being. As such, this view-point can only be mine. If some conservatives, liberals or libertarians (I don't know anyone that would fit into any of these molds to any significant degree) agree, then it's a happy coincidence. So please, keep your enlightenment about what I should do to yourself.
While I admire Mr. Hicks with a passion, he's not always correct in his assessments.
The lakes aren't just yours, you know...
You get panned because you generalize. Each of the activities has a potential for irresponsibility, non of them mean the person is irresponsible. Labeling them as such is insulting. I suggest that you point it out to yourself, keep it to yourself, and stop throwing labels around at strangers who do not know who you are, or why they should listen to you.
I can never tell what it is you're peddling. Do *what*????
Our production and distribution is already severely disrupted by political interests. Nothing will change in that regard.
NISUS
Next. Crucifixion?
CHEEKY
Eh? No, freedom.
NISUS
What?
CHEEKY
Eh, freedom for me. They said I hadn't done anything, so I could go free and
live on an island somewhere.
NISUS
Oh? Oh, that's jolly good. Well, off you go then!
CHEEKY
Naah. I'm only pulling your leg. It's crucifixion really.
NISUS
Oho, I see. Very good very good. Well, out of the door...
CHEEKY
[cheerily] Yeah. I know the way. Out of the door, one cross each, line on
the left.
NISUS
Line on the left, yes. Thank you. Crucifixion? Good.
Yes, he had a stroke. But that's hardly the reason. It may have something to do with the world-wide state of medicine in the early 20th century. You wouldn't have more of a chance after a stroke regardless of where you were at the time.
Try this:
1) Your payscale doesn't reflect you
2) Your payscale is often corelated to your personality (the qualifier 'most' is part of the quoted text in your post)
I guess it's too much to ask that you realize that corelation is not causation without having it spelled out for you.
At any rate, the post is typical of a grammar nazi. Entierly missing the point of the message only to pick on some minor linguistic inconsistency and failing to realize the original author couldn't give less of a shit.
You've missed the forest for the trees. Yes, Javascript was concieved as a client-side language. So it is a bit backwards to a lot of us to see it run on the server. Especially since the server isn't really lacking in a choice of language. Also, I've only seen amatures claim that it isn't a real language, professionals tend to use it liberaly when dealing with UX (it's the right tool for that job). The problem with amatures writing it is not them writing it, it's us maintaining it. Getting something out the door is simple, if you're never going to improve on it. That's hardly ever the case though. As soon as something is out, there is usually a 2.0 version in the back of someone's head. It's far more difficult to mold the existing steaming pile into a different one than coming up with the different one from scratch. The inconsistency is really only in your perception.
Get out. Now. Save your sanity. Stress will impair you physically. You don't need a stroke at 45.
Parse error. I think I almost get it...
I find myself in the same boat. I doubt it's about ego at this point. I know what I cannot do. But as far as time estimates go, I'm consistantly and spectacularly off. No amount of humility seemed to have ever helped.
Corrupt and stupid is one thing... but why give them a hard time for the gangbangs?
Except there was no actual taunt. Carelessness at best. And a judge being able to do this to anyone is absolutely horrifying.
I don't think you comperhand what you are saying. A few blocks could verywell be half a day's walk.
While they require a viewing public, that is basically an endless stream. They can absorb most of the backlash and not even notice. Once they are hit with reduced revenew, they notice. It's not that hard to see why we are second rate to them.
Keep in mind... I'm not in/from the US. So I may be more fun at parties than you think. :)
Supposed to be according to whom?
You're not their customer.