Thank god. Have you watched your local morning traffic report? People have yet to figure out how to drive land-based vehicles without crashing into each other. I don't think we need cars falling from the sky because some guy was too busy shaving and hit some chick putting on her make-up at 100 feet.
Now if they invented vehicles that just hovered 2-3 feet off the ground, I be all over that. No need for paved roads, bridges, salt/sand on roads in winter. Just make it better looking and hold more people than this one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landspeeder
My Windows 7 experience didn't make it to far. I was under the impression that if it would run on Vista, it would run on 7. Apparently not true for the version of Trend AV for Vista, as it bricked my 7 install.
If Humanity is still around then (highly unlikely) it will long since have had the technology and resources required to push the Earth to a new, stable and habitable orbit.
Hmmm.... what would be easier, finding a new Earth or moving the one we have? And if we just move the planet, we're only buying ourselves a few billion years before the sun takes out the whole solar system.
I'm sure we'll develop something that can shift us around the universe - even if it's just building a generation-ship, but will it be big enough to take *everyone*?
If not, I have some suggestions on who we can leave behind. And would we really WANT to take everyone?
I'm a computer tech for a district with many buildings. The only way I can be reached most of the week is via my Blackberry.
Our custodial staff all have two-way pagers so they can be paged to clean-ups and the like.
Yes the buildings have PA systems, but those are used at a minimum so they don't interfere with classes.
This idea is just stupid on so many levels. I have to agree with many of the posters here. if you want to make a policy saying students can't use cell phones in school, fine. Then just enforce it by taking them away until the end of the day.
To substitute "changing the station when an advert comes on" for "paying outrageous fees for data transfer".
To be able to listen to live broadcasts of sporting events without paying a membership fee to some site.
To take advantage of the economy of large-scale broadcast delivery instead of relatively expensive parallel non-broadcast media.
But you do get other things from broadcast radio that mp3 players don't as easily give you: exposure to new music, the ability to listen to music not in your catalog for free, without copyright infringement (I know, that may not be an issue for many slashdotters).
Yes, mp3 players have a lot of advantages, but they also have disadvantages. Cost to retrieve data and/or purchase music being the big ones in my book.
Yes it would be great if it were built-in and you didn't have to pay extra for it, but you have to draw the line somewhere. The iPod doesn't have a built in camera (yet) either and I'd find that more useful than a radio tuner. Radio is such niche technology when you consider that a good portion of the US has nothing but country music stations.
And where I live the only decent channels for live sports are on AM.
Agreed. We had a break in our fiber connection the other day and half the staff asked me why the "server" was down. Users are dumb, that's why you have a job. Enjoy it.
Personally, I love tabs and don't have a problem with them. When I open FF I usually open on of my bookmark folders in new tabs (about 20 tabs). These are my daily read sites. I also have all my WoW addons in a similar folder. All get opened at once (about 50 tabs). When I "surf" if I see a link I want to follow I almost always open it in a new tab so I can go to it when I'm done on the page I'm on.
What I would like to see is a better keyboard command for switching between tabs. Something simple that can be done quickly with one hand.
Agreed. Meat is meat. The only thing preventing you from eating your neighbor is society's moral values. Although, some people don't comply with those (remember Jeffrey Dahmer?).
I'm not saying we should kill people and eat them. I'm just saying we're all made of meat. Mmmm.... meat.
Actually, if I'm remembering this correctly, they were just filling in the ships crew with cadets. I was under the impression that Chekov was a cadet as well. I could be wrong, I've only seen it once so far.
I do think it was odd that they gave him the Federation flagship just because of this incident. But I'm guessing that the newly promoted Admiral Pike had something do to do with it. And it's not that weird (in movies) for a Captain to have a lot of say in his successor.
You've had 24 hour news channels talking about this for over a week. It's too late to rename it. Everyone is going to remember it as swine flu. End of story
Speaking of which, who keeps letting kdawson post this crap?
I don't disagree with you, but to me, lobbying and campaign finance reform are necessities; while I wouldn't mind not seeing term limits in my lifetime. I think the former is much more of a threat to democracy than the later.
I guess I kind of go both ways on this. One side of me says, we already have term limits for all elected officials: they're called elections. I have a problem with telling people "the person you want to vote for is ineligible to serve, because they're served for too long." Seems undemocratic. If the people want him/her, they should be able to vote them in, even if they're 100 years old.
I'd have to agree with you on the first point. I would rather see those reforms before term limits. The problem I have with using elections as a form of term limit is that most of the time the incumbent gets re-elected because the person voting recognizes the name on the ballot. Plus part of the reason for having a term limit on the President is to avoid the slippery slope towards "president for life".
I'm of the opinion that the founding fathers didn't have career politicians in mind when they were setting up our government. I'd rather less career politicians and more elected officials who want to get elected, accomplish something and then go back to being private citizens.
Without a base of power, expertise, and fundraising, fresh-face candidates are going to be *more* reliant on special interest campaign funding and lobbyist expertise, when they have the opportunity to go for a seat held by an establishment person. The longer you're there, the more power and independence you have.
You don't see freshmen being able to pass great bills that help the common person. Nobody owes them any favors. Sucks, but sucks less.
That to me says that we need lobbyist reforms as well as campaign finance reforms. Get rid of lobbyists complete and make your elected officials listen to their constituency for a change instead of the special interests. Being there longer doesn't give the official a better chance of resisting the lobbyists, it lets the lobbyists learn what they can do to persuade the official.
I'm not saying we turn over all officials every year. Right now each state has 2 senators that serve 6 year terms. I'm saying put a 3 term limit on being a senator. That's 18 years. Almost 2 decades.
Representatives in the house serve a 2 year term. Make it a 4 year term with a 3 term max and they get 12 years that they can be in that position.
I think by limiting their time in office, we force them to get the stuff done they really want to get done.
Funny, we have laws that prevent children from working. That is age discrimination, that is acceptable to you, but preventing people who are likely not fit for the job isn't acceptable because they are old?
Your fear of what happens to you when you get old is clouding your judgment.
Yes we have child labor laws. Are they technically age discrimination? I suppose you could look at it that way. Part of the reason for having them is to keep children from competing with adults for low pay labor jobs. But the other part is to keep them out of the work force and in school where they will be more valuable to the future of the country.
I was simply making a point that there are age discrimination laws and that something where we forced someone out of a position just because they reached a certain age would be contradictory to them. Although, I think to say that anyone over a certain age has nothing of value to add to the argument is just plain stupid.
That's why I think term limits would be a good solution so you can have fresh ideas every so often. And yes, I know we could just elect new people, but that doesn't happen. The point is that no one should be able to hold a position for a half century.
He's 79. Have you ever noticed politicians all want you and me to retire by 72 at the latest? But they're supposed to keep getting into office until they're dead? And in some cases afterward? We need to have an age limit on politicians and judges. Over 70 and they should ALL be forced out of office. That's a law that really needs to be passed.
I'm guessing there are age discrimination laws against that.
What I would like to see passed are term limits for ALL elected officials. Maybe even a term limit for the Supreme Court. Or maybe not a limit, maybe make their appointment last 12 years and then they're done.
Slashdot Mirror
Thank god. Have you watched your local morning traffic report? People have yet to figure out how to drive land-based vehicles without crashing into each other. I don't think we need cars falling from the sky because some guy was too busy shaving and hit some chick putting on her make-up at 100 feet.
Now if they invented vehicles that just hovered 2-3 feet off the ground, I be all over that. No need for paved roads, bridges, salt/sand on roads in winter. Just make it better looking and hold more people than this one. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landspeeder
I like to think of that as modern day natural selection.
My Windows 7 experience didn't make it to far. I was under the impression that if it would run on Vista, it would run on 7. Apparently not true for the version of Trend AV for Vista, as it bricked my 7 install.
Had to reinstall 7.
If Humanity is still around then (highly unlikely) it will long since have had the technology and resources required to push the Earth to a new, stable and habitable orbit.
Hmmm.... what would be easier, finding a new Earth or moving the one we have? And if we just move the planet, we're only buying ourselves a few billion years before the sun takes out the whole solar system.
I'm sure we'll develop something that can shift us around the universe - even if it's just building a generation-ship, but will it be big enough to take *everyone*?
If not, I have some suggestions on who we can leave behind. And would we really WANT to take everyone?
It's like using the Edsel to represent Ford, its just old and stale.
Which is the perfect way to represent Microsoft, since their products are both old and stale.
I'm a computer tech for a district with many buildings. The only way I can be reached most of the week is via my Blackberry.
Our custodial staff all have two-way pagers so they can be paged to clean-ups and the like.
Yes the buildings have PA systems, but those are used at a minimum so they don't interfere with classes.
This idea is just stupid on so many levels. I have to agree with many of the posters here. if you want to make a policy saying students can't use cell phones in school, fine. Then just enforce it by taking them away until the end of the day.
Fly? One does not simply fly into Mordor.
The last time I was at a comic shop there was a guy in a cloak in there. But I also saw normal everyday looking kids in the D & D section.
What does this tell us, stereotypes are based in fact but aren't true for all.
To substitute "changing the station when an advert comes on" for "paying outrageous fees for data transfer".
To be able to listen to live broadcasts of sporting events without paying a membership fee to some site.
To take advantage of the economy of large-scale broadcast delivery instead of relatively expensive parallel non-broadcast media.
But you do get other things from broadcast radio that mp3 players don't as easily give you: exposure to new music, the ability to listen to music not in your catalog for free, without copyright infringement (I know, that may not be an issue for many slashdotters).
Yes, mp3 players have a lot of advantages, but they also have disadvantages. Cost to retrieve data and/or purchase music being the big ones in my book.
It's called an accessory. Here are a couple for you http://store.apple.com/us/product/MA070G/D?mco=NDY5MDE0MQ and http://store.apple.com/us/product/TU825VC/A?mco=NDk1NDIyOA.
Yes it would be great if it were built-in and you didn't have to pay extra for it, but you have to draw the line somewhere. The iPod doesn't have a built in camera (yet) either and I'd find that more useful than a radio tuner. Radio is such niche technology when you consider that a good portion of the US has nothing but country music stations.
And where I live the only decent channels for live sports are on AM.
I wonder if my school can get a grant for these.
Agreed. We had a break in our fiber connection the other day and half the staff asked me why the "server" was down. Users are dumb, that's why you have a job. Enjoy it.
Personally, I love tabs and don't have a problem with them. When I open FF I usually open on of my bookmark folders in new tabs (about 20 tabs). These are my daily read sites. I also have all my WoW addons in a similar folder. All get opened at once (about 50 tabs). When I "surf" if I see a link I want to follow I almost always open it in a new tab so I can go to it when I'm done on the page I'm on.
What I would like to see is a better keyboard command for switching between tabs. Something simple that can be done quickly with one hand.
Agreed. Meat is meat. The only thing preventing you from eating your neighbor is society's moral values. Although, some people don't comply with those (remember Jeffrey Dahmer?).
I'm not saying we should kill people and eat them. I'm just saying we're all made of meat. Mmmm.... meat.
So when will the Apple "Windows 7 Tax" commercials start rolling out?
Well they blew up A ship at the end.
Actually, if I'm remembering this correctly, they were just filling in the ships crew with cadets. I was under the impression that Chekov was a cadet as well. I could be wrong, I've only seen it once so far.
I do think it was odd that they gave him the Federation flagship just because of this incident. But I'm guessing that the newly promoted Admiral Pike had something do to do with it. And it's not that weird (in movies) for a Captain to have a lot of say in his successor.
Sweet. What did it drop? Maybe a random green?
Exactly. You can't get people to pay for news these days. Why would they pay for crappy videos?
You've had 24 hour news channels talking about this for over a week. It's too late to rename it. Everyone is going to remember it as swine flu. End of story
Speaking of which, who keeps letting kdawson post this crap?
Why couldn't they release this as Windows 7 instead of what they are releasing which is essentially Vista SP 3?
I don't disagree with you, but to me, lobbying and campaign finance reform are necessities; while I wouldn't mind not seeing term limits in my lifetime. I think the former is much more of a threat to democracy than the later.
I guess I kind of go both ways on this. One side of me says, we already have term limits for all elected officials: they're called elections. I have a problem with telling people "the person you want to vote for is ineligible to serve, because they're served for too long." Seems undemocratic. If the people want him/her, they should be able to vote them in, even if they're 100 years old.
I'd have to agree with you on the first point. I would rather see those reforms before term limits. The problem I have with using elections as a form of term limit is that most of the time the incumbent gets re-elected because the person voting recognizes the name on the ballot. Plus part of the reason for having a term limit on the President is to avoid the slippery slope towards "president for life".
I'm of the opinion that the founding fathers didn't have career politicians in mind when they were setting up our government. I'd rather less career politicians and more elected officials who want to get elected, accomplish something and then go back to being private citizens.
Without a base of power, expertise, and fundraising, fresh-face candidates are going to be *more* reliant on special interest campaign funding and lobbyist expertise, when they have the opportunity to go for a seat held by an establishment person. The longer you're there, the more power and independence you have.
You don't see freshmen being able to pass great bills that help the common person. Nobody owes them any favors. Sucks, but sucks less.
That to me says that we need lobbyist reforms as well as campaign finance reforms. Get rid of lobbyists complete and make your elected officials listen to their constituency for a change instead of the special interests. Being there longer doesn't give the official a better chance of resisting the lobbyists, it lets the lobbyists learn what they can do to persuade the official.
I'm not saying we turn over all officials every year. Right now each state has 2 senators that serve 6 year terms. I'm saying put a 3 term limit on being a senator. That's 18 years. Almost 2 decades.
Representatives in the house serve a 2 year term. Make it a 4 year term with a 3 term max and they get 12 years that they can be in that position.
I think by limiting their time in office, we force them to get the stuff done they really want to get done.
Funny, we have laws that prevent children from working. That is age discrimination, that is acceptable to you, but preventing people who are likely not fit for the job isn't acceptable because they are old?
Your fear of what happens to you when you get old is clouding your judgment.
Yes we have child labor laws. Are they technically age discrimination? I suppose you could look at it that way. Part of the reason for having them is to keep children from competing with adults for low pay labor jobs. But the other part is to keep them out of the work force and in school where they will be more valuable to the future of the country.
I was simply making a point that there are age discrimination laws and that something where we forced someone out of a position just because they reached a certain age would be contradictory to them. Although, I think to say that anyone over a certain age has nothing of value to add to the argument is just plain stupid.
That's why I think term limits would be a good solution so you can have fresh ideas every so often. And yes, I know we could just elect new people, but that doesn't happen. The point is that no one should be able to hold a position for a half century.
He's 79. Have you ever noticed politicians all want you and me to retire by 72 at the latest? But they're supposed to keep getting into office until they're dead? And in some cases afterward? We need to have an age limit on politicians and judges. Over 70 and they should ALL be forced out of office. That's a law that really needs to be passed.
I'm guessing there are age discrimination laws against that.
What I would like to see passed are term limits for ALL elected officials. Maybe even a term limit for the Supreme Court. Or maybe not a limit, maybe make their appointment last 12 years and then they're done.