I think you're right about a lot of Black people, especially females, being anti-gay. But I don't know if it's a majority. And I don't see how you can turn "anti-gay" into "anti-everything". Are you saying a large percentage of Black people also voted for anti-Jewish, anti-Asian, and anti-Hispanic measures or did you figure you could milk the example you cited for the anti-gay claim and maybe no one would notice you're wrongly using it to validate everything else you said?
Spyware Doctor worked for me. If you can handle the $30 price and this is really driving you crazy, I think it's worth trying. Note that it uses a lot of RAM and CPU cycles.
I don't know. If I'm getting paid to do it, the last thing I want to do is give my best to somebody who is going to make it so I'll never get paid to do it again. I'd be compelled to give him something that gets the job done and makes him happy, but I can still beat later if I have to. I'd be more compelled to give my best to somebody who is not releasing the source code. If he wants to release my best to the world, he should be paying me with my future loss of income in mind, to make it worth my while. It's not that I'm against free software. It's just having your source of income cut off will hurt.
That reminds me of my schizophrenic uncle, who would nail all his windows and closet doors shut to prevent break-ins, and write everything on paper and show it to us because he thought people might be outside with a monitoring device, listening to him. I guess it's possible that somebody was hiding in the house or spying on him, but if they weren't then all he accomplished was slowing himself down and restricting his living space.
You might actually be avoiding a virus, but you also might be slowing yourself down and limiting yourself to webpages that are just pictures and colored text.
I was in the Apple store, asking a Genius why Ms. Pac-Man, which ran on an Atari 2600, is taking up almost 20 megabytes on my iPod Nano. He told me it's because they have to fit all those in-game sound effects into the download. Pure genius.
The people, who really need cryptography, basically need the rest of us to use it even though we don't need it, so we will become the noise that keeps them from standing out.
I'm not saying it should happen. I just thought you said something interesting and asked a question that I thought would make it even more interesting. You see, some people believe in a pluralistic society, democracy is basically a form of oppression. That would mean, in a country where there are people of various cultural backgrounds, each culture is going to have its own values and its own rules that it would like to put in place. So if the majority rules then whichever group has the most members will get its way and all of the other groups just have to accept that. I thought it would be interesting to ask if you thought it would be good for those groups to overcome that problem by giving each group an equal number of electorates rather than counting the sheer number of people in each group. I asked that because you seemed to suggest it is a good idea to do just that, except when geographical location is the distinguishing factor rather than culture. Look at what happens when we swap a few of your words with mine:
MightyYar: I actually LIKE the electoral college. I think it's a good way to give low-population races a bigger voice. To use the worst-case as an example, the American Indian population only has half a million people and so would count as about only 0.2% in a pure popular vote election. Safe to say that no candidate would pay any attention at all to American Indians no matter how close the race. Because they get 3 electors, though, they effectively more than double their vote in the Presidential election.
Is it the most fair way to do this? No. But I'd want to make sure that anything that replaces the electoral college would still protect racial groups with a low population.
Personally, I'd love to see some kind of preference-based voting done at least at the hair color level to see if it would work on a large scale.
Amber: Would you feel the same way if each state was given an equal number of electoral college votes instead of breaking it down by race? I think all the same logic applies.
MightyYar: States?? Wha? First of all, the idea that an entire state should vote as a block is ridiculous and outmoded. I'm hoping that we eventually get past that, and not build it into our system!
Second, your race is not a choice whereas the state you live in is. To me, discrimination based on state is analogous to discrimination based on city or county.
A guy could be all the rage in the tech community when word gets out that he's replaced all of his environment-killing light bulbs with his incandescent penis... and I have to say, it could help a girl in the dark if the thing lit up. I'm just saying.
Would you feel the same way if each race/ethnic group was given an equal number of electoral college votes instead of breaking it down by state? I think all the same logic applies.
Well this is my experience based on our efforts to eat healthy with limited money. A frozen dinner may be the same or lower cost than a McDonald's value meal, but food that must be cooked will cost less than either one. So real poor people go for raw meat and vegetables, and just cook it themselves. The problem here is, healthier foods like turkey and salmon will cost more than beef or pork. And the leaner beef and pork costs more than the fatter beef and pork. As stated before, juice costs more than carbonated soda. For dessert, Twinkies cost way less than fruit. Everything with corn syrup costs less than fruit. So if you're talking about real poor people, then yes it does cost more to eat healthy. If you're talking about people who can afford to eat at all their meals at McDonald's then you're not talking about real poor people.
I agree, it gets harder to eat healthy if you're lazy because you have to cook your own food. I disagree that potatoes, beans, and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Chips and twinkies cost less. It might be possible to buy just the beans for less.
About the Odwalla juice. According to Wikipedia, Odwalla is a health food company. So you just said healthy eating cost less, and then cited an example of health food with an outrageous price. I also don't know any actual poor people who would spend $15 on any juice whatsoever.
I don't think things like Escalades become popular because they're mentioned in rap music. I think they're mentioned in rap music because they're popular, and expensive. I also think in this case, "bullshit" is an opinion with no reasoning involved.
They may not be making money from the books, but if Google is selling ads with their book search then Google is making money from people who want to read these books. So who should that money go to?
I have a friend who I used to use as my test for my software's useability. He was a fairly intelligent person, but he was new to computers and didn't know much about them. He would tell me about the things he didn't understand, and the things that needed to be added or taken away for a pleasant experience. When he found my stuff useful and easy to use, I knew it was ready. I think if more of the Linux developors had a guy like that, Linux would be much more competitive against Mac and Windows. The thing is, they do have such people. But they deride them by saying "build it yourself" or declaring these people to be too stupid to use a real operating system. Then they have long debates, trying to figure out how a slower, less stable operating system seems to always have more appeal to the masses.
This is yet another proof that 99.9% of consumers are sheep.
The secret is, normal people don't know what DRM is and can't be bothered with the debate of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution. Only on Slashdot are both those factors considered when buying a computer game. I'm aware of DRM and still trying to decide if that will stop me from getting Spore when I get my new computer. It probably will but I'm really interested in this game. I like games like Sim City and ActRaiser.
Anyway, every time there's a comment on Slashdot that I feel is anti-Black or anti-China and I respond, the other person's comment gets modded +5 and I get modded flamebait or troll. If I can put up with that on Slashdot then you can put up with EA getting a +5 Interesting on Amazon.com
In the 90's, KPRS decided to take a stand against negative music by refusing to play certain songs. Every night they had a countdown in which they would play the most requested songs of the day. The problem was the number one song on their countdown was Snoop Dogg's 'Gin & Juice' which was one of the songs they were protesting. So they played the rest of the songs and just stated the name of the number 1 song. It seemed like a good thing at the time but I have to wonder about a radio station that bans its most requested song.
I think it's more than that. A big problem for Firefox is the people click on the big blue E and it actually works fine. So they don't have any obvious reason to look further.
A big problem for Opera users is the people who claim there should be a choice of browsers usually mean there should be a choice between IE, Firefox, and maybe Safari. I've had sites work fine with Opera and then one day they just stop working because the webmaster decides to suddenly start checking user agent strings.
So a site that works fine on Tuesday is telling me my browser is incompatible on Wednesday, and the only thing I can do is change the user agent string, which isn't going to help the makers of the alternative browser at all.
Slashdot Mirror
I think you're right about a lot of Black people, especially females, being anti-gay. But I don't know if it's a majority. And I don't see how you can turn "anti-gay" into "anti-everything". Are you saying a large percentage of Black people also voted for anti-Jewish, anti-Asian, and anti-Hispanic measures or did you figure you could milk the example you cited for the anti-gay claim and maybe no one would notice you're wrongly using it to validate everything else you said?
Spyware Doctor worked for me. If you can handle the $30 price and this is really driving you crazy, I think it's worth trying. Note that it uses a lot of RAM and CPU cycles.
I don't know. If I'm getting paid to do it, the last thing I want to do is give my best to somebody who is going to make it so I'll never get paid to do it again. I'd be compelled to give him something that gets the job done and makes him happy, but I can still beat later if I have to. I'd be more compelled to give my best to somebody who is not releasing the source code. If he wants to release my best to the world, he should be paying me with my future loss of income in mind, to make it worth my while. It's not that I'm against free software. It's just having your source of income cut off will hurt.
That reminds me of my schizophrenic uncle, who would nail all his windows and closet doors shut to prevent break-ins, and write everything on paper and show it to us because he thought people might be outside with a monitoring device, listening to him. I guess it's possible that somebody was hiding in the house or spying on him, but if they weren't then all he accomplished was slowing himself down and restricting his living space.
You might actually be avoiding a virus, but you also might be slowing yourself down and limiting yourself to webpages that are just pictures and colored text.
I refuse to take part in any deadly revolt that doesn't have mouse support.
It depends on which is more annoying between (using more blank cd's) and (having to put in all the cd's to get a file on one of them).
Maybe they should tag the stories 'firehose' and '!firehose'.
I was in the Apple store, asking a Genius why Ms. Pac-Man, which ran on an Atari 2600, is taking up almost 20 megabytes on my iPod Nano. He told me it's because they have to fit all those in-game sound effects into the download. Pure genius.
The people, who really need cryptography, basically need the rest of us to use it even though we don't need it, so we will become the noise that keeps them from standing out.
I'm not saying it should happen. I just thought you said something interesting and asked a question that I thought would make it even more interesting. You see, some people believe in a pluralistic society, democracy is basically a form of oppression. That would mean, in a country where there are people of various cultural backgrounds, each culture is going to have its own values and its own rules that it would like to put in place. So if the majority rules then whichever group has the most members will get its way and all of the other groups just have to accept that. I thought it would be interesting to ask if you thought it would be good for those groups to overcome that problem by giving each group an equal number of electorates rather than counting the sheer number of people in each group. I asked that because you seemed to suggest it is a good idea to do just that, except when geographical location is the distinguishing factor rather than culture. Look at what happens when we swap a few of your words with mine:
MightyYar: I actually LIKE the electoral college. I think it's a good way to give low-population races a bigger voice. To use the worst-case as an example, the American Indian population only has half a million people and so would count as about only 0.2% in a pure popular vote election. Safe to say that no candidate would pay any attention at all to American Indians no matter how close the race. Because they get 3 electors, though, they effectively more than double their vote in the Presidential election.
Is it the most fair way to do this? No. But I'd want to make sure that anything that replaces the electoral college would still protect racial groups with a low population.
Personally, I'd love to see some kind of preference-based voting done at least at the hair color level to see if it would work on a large scale.
Amber: Would you feel the same way if each state was given an equal number of electoral college votes instead of breaking it down by race? I think all the same logic applies.
MightyYar: States?? Wha? First of all, the idea that an entire state should vote as a block is ridiculous and outmoded. I'm hoping that we eventually get past that, and not build it into our system!
Second, your race is not a choice whereas the state you live in is. To me, discrimination based on state is analogous to discrimination based on city or county.
A guy could be all the rage in the tech community when word gets out that he's replaced all of his environment-killing light bulbs with his incandescent penis... and I have to say, it could help a girl in the dark if the thing lit up. I'm just saying.
I look forward to killing your packaging soon...
I've found a katana is much faster.
Would you feel the same way if each race/ethnic group was given an equal number of electoral college votes instead of breaking it down by state? I think all the same logic applies.
Well this is my experience based on our efforts to eat healthy with limited money. A frozen dinner may be the same or lower cost than a McDonald's value meal, but food that must be cooked will cost less than either one. So real poor people go for raw meat and vegetables, and just cook it themselves. The problem here is, healthier foods like turkey and salmon will cost more than beef or pork. And the leaner beef and pork costs more than the fatter beef and pork. As stated before, juice costs more than carbonated soda. For dessert, Twinkies cost way less than fruit. Everything with corn syrup costs less than fruit. So if you're talking about real poor people, then yes it does cost more to eat healthy. If you're talking about people who can afford to eat at all their meals at McDonald's then you're not talking about real poor people.
I agree, it gets harder to eat healthy if you're lazy because you have to cook your own food. I disagree that potatoes, beans, and vegetables are cheaper than junk food. Chips and twinkies cost less. It might be possible to buy just the beans for less.
About the Odwalla juice. According to Wikipedia, Odwalla is a health food company. So you just said healthy eating cost less, and then cited an example of health food with an outrageous price. I also don't know any actual poor people who would spend $15 on any juice whatsoever.
I don't think things like Escalades become popular because they're mentioned in rap music. I think they're mentioned in rap music because they're popular, and expensive. I also think in this case, "bullshit" is an opinion with no reasoning involved.
!funny !worththetime !possibletodisabletags !again
Maybe they're rolling up those apple chips and smoking them.
They may not be making money from the books, but if Google is selling ads with their book search then Google is making money from people who want to read these books. So who should that money go to?
I have a friend who I used to use as my test for my software's useability. He was a fairly intelligent person, but he was new to computers and didn't know much about them. He would tell me about the things he didn't understand, and the things that needed to be added or taken away for a pleasant experience. When he found my stuff useful and easy to use, I knew it was ready. I think if more of the Linux developors had a guy like that, Linux would be much more competitive against Mac and Windows. The thing is, they do have such people. But they deride them by saying "build it yourself" or declaring these people to be too stupid to use a real operating system. Then they have long debates, trying to figure out how a slower, less stable operating system seems to always have more appeal to the masses.
This is yet another proof that 99.9% of consumers are sheep.
The secret is, normal people don't know what DRM is and can't be bothered with the debate of Intelligent Design vs. Evolution. Only on Slashdot are both those factors considered when buying a computer game. I'm aware of DRM and still trying to decide if that will stop me from getting Spore when I get my new computer. It probably will but I'm really interested in this game. I like games like Sim City and ActRaiser.
Anyway, every time there's a comment on Slashdot that I feel is anti-Black or anti-China and I respond, the other person's comment gets modded +5 and I get modded flamebait or troll. If I can put up with that on Slashdot then you can put up with EA getting a +5 Interesting on Amazon.com
In the 90's, KPRS decided to take a stand against negative music by refusing to play certain songs. Every night they had a countdown in which they would play the most requested songs of the day. The problem was the number one song on their countdown was Snoop Dogg's 'Gin & Juice' which was one of the songs they were protesting. So they played the rest of the songs and just stated the name of the number 1 song. It seemed like a good thing at the time but I have to wonder about a radio station that bans its most requested song.
I think it's more than that. A big problem for Firefox is the people click on the big blue E and it actually works fine. So they don't have any obvious reason to look further.
A big problem for Opera users is the people who claim there should be a choice of browsers usually mean there should be a choice between IE, Firefox, and maybe Safari. I've had sites work fine with Opera and then one day they just stop working because the webmaster decides to suddenly start checking user agent strings.
So a site that works fine on Tuesday is telling me my browser is incompatible on Wednesday, and the only thing I can do is change the user agent string, which isn't going to help the makers of the alternative browser at all.
So the Microsoft bashing this time is a pre-emptive strike? Or is it for a thought crime?
If your e-mail address is your screen name then everybody who knows your screen name also knows your e-mail address.