Deploying of persons to events of topics that are controversial may cause conflict and problems.
Shall we ban protests?
A company has no right to make a restriction like that just because it causes problems, the only thing that the problem justifies is bringing up the topic to the table. The problem does not justify the solution, only the search for a solution.
He has every right to infer what another may think and post his inferences.
Are you saying he should have said "I think that think that..."?
Ew, that phrasing leaves such a bad taste in my mouth, nevermind all the English teachers who said never say/write "I think..." because it's obvious that "I think..."
If, yes then are you saying it takes no more than that to qualify as a non-idiot. Don't you think that's a bit silly?
Sometimes it hurts to think, so I get the endorphine kick I need from sarcasm.
Go look it up.
I was merely taking your logical construction and replacing the variables. Okay so I stretched it.
Like so: You said that the poster was claiming some sort of extrasensory perception because he used the word think, when in fact the word think can easily mean believe or something similar. Even my kids know that.
So I said that going by that logic, then Saddam Hussein's surrender would come becuase he somehow suddenly saw the light of truth_ver_1.0-US (does that hurt?), and not because of other reasons.
The bit about a true American yada yada, that's just me picking on Big Brother Bush and his otherthinkisbadthink (ouch!).
You know I'm still mad at you for calling that guy an idiot when you couldn't even parse the use of the word think. That kinda sticks out like a sore thumb, don't you think?
See now you made decompress my earlier post into this boring rant. Bad poster, bad, bad poster.
It's not the difference of opinion, it's the mix of arrogance and spinelessness of certain individuals (having lived in the US most of my life, I know what arrogance is when I see it).
I made a cheap shot because I saw the opportunity for a joke and to blow off some steam.
France has been rather ungrateful in various remarks and attitudes considering events that happened half a century ago.
If the story had been France is spaceworthy again, I probably would have stuck to that.
I also have some bones to pick with Europeans who get upset about our freedoms being supposedly so dangerous. Sure there's plenty of whiners in the US, but that's because they're ignorant. The North American continent is basically three countries, US, Canada, and Mexico. There aren't enough players on this piece of dirt to make any sort of alliance or conspiracy work.
Now Europe having seen war after war might have a reason to feel sensitive to violence and things associated with violence. But I could argue that it's quite the opposite. Having seen so much war, they should be able to tell the bloody difference between coordinated armed military assault and self-worth and defense against burglary and kidnapping of the random variety.
Incidentally, I think this war is frightening. Millions protest and no one in the news media tries to get in depth commentary. All we get is support Bush if you're a real American.
The nationalist is the one who wouldn't leave so following your superficial logic he should be heard, or something. assuming one were so bored to follow that train of thought to its conclusion, a wreck.
Worst whine in the world: "Hey shut up cuz I don't care really. I swear I don't care. Really, I don't care a single bit about this."
Even if the world was coming to an end and this kind of inquisition was the only way to guarantee that a country would be the last one to have the sky fall on it, I wouldn't submit to it. Even if it were possible to reverse the end of the world this way. Even if there were no blatant contradictions in thes presumed usefulness of such an inquisition.
if that's all that's left for a society, we're already DEAD.
This is what I think of your cry baby logic.
1. I do not believe any entity is entitled to any "something that must be admissable", expecially one that does not accept that scenario. You are not trustworthy if cannot accept no for an answer.
2. What makes you think you're not the one wasting people's time?
3. A demonstration:
Enter Little Snivelling Investigator - a man who can't provide any useful service to the law enforcement industry and so precariously hanging onto fulfilling his intelligence quota to avoid getting fired that he harrasses anyone he can and devises ways of justifying his Inquisitions
Enter Big Voice - The transfigured to deity form of Superman, Gandhi, Crocodile Dundee, Ben Franklin, Marie Curie, Mother Teresa, Joan of Arc, Lara Croft, or whoever happens to be one's hero.
Little Snivelling Investigator:We want to see what kind of magazine you read.
and I suppose Newton got a substatial investment to develop calculus.
Companies aren't the only ones cap[bleof producing results.
Sure there's a question of research, but that isn't limited to companies carrying out the work.
Look at genetics. Celera took how many $millions to develop their database. They didn't invent the techniques. Then here comes a researcher with concerns about having access and rights to knowledge. He takes a hundred Pentium boxes, sets them to work, and in a short time using a small fraction of what it cost Celera, he creates a competing product.
Patents are outdated. They were made to encourage companies to take the cost of distribution and manufacturing. Long ago it was more costly to deliver a product than to invent and test it.
The problem was one of added cost in physical labor and materials which have a definite monetary value.
That's not the case anymore. The cost is greater in the engineering and knowledge phase both of which have social and personal value.
If I build a computer, it'll cost me X, and I charge X+Y to get my profit at the end of the day,
Engineering and research into new areas is like russian roulette, you can easily never discover anything and run out of money and you can easily hit on a gold mine having spent very little.
Subsidizing the deficit in knowledge with cash is just plain gambling, and then you expect the rest of the world which needs (not wants) your product to maintain your habit when sharing the knowledge would clear everyone's deficit. Knowledge takes up no volume and costs infinitesimal amounts in cash compared to the gambling cost.
Go ahead patent some aphrodisiac, I could care less, it's omething people might want but hardly need, But don't come to me with your Economics 101 pedantics when things that are necessary are concerned.
If someone with a social concern can outdo a company two things come to mind:
1. What kind of idiots or worse greedy bastards does Celera employ?
2. How much more can someone who doesn't want to die do given they can reach any researcher they want if they do a little homework?
When I see "the free market is the only way" I wish there was a Godwins Law clause for it.
It's flawed for the following reason:
What does free market have to do with money?
Nothing. Zilch. Zip. Zero. The free market means the right to trade, not the entitlement to profit. A market that is anchored on laws beyond the concept of theft, laws which define new thefts, that market is not a free market, it is a sheltered market. A truly free market would have only the laws of physical property and laws of contracts in its context.
Plenty of people suffering from unsolved deadly diseases are banding together to get information and research and fund raisers.
I think the loss of an opportunity to make billions is sufficiently compensated by the desire of terminally ill people to beat their disease unless it's painful.
Your argument works for microchips and space shuttles but it trips all over itself when it comes to life and death.
You can't link Java to gtk, gnome, kde, qt, or any other useful development base. I know there's CORBA, but that's so indirect compared to a direct link.
Until the bindings are possible, it's going to be a niche product.
Slashdot Mirror
Deploying of persons to events of topics that are controversial may cause conflict and problems.
Shall we ban protests?
A company has no right to make a restriction like that just because it causes problems, the only thing that the problem justifies is bringing up the topic to the table. The problem does not justify the solution, only the search for a solution.
This isn't kindergarten.
He has every right to infer what another may think and post his inferences.
..." because it's obvious that "I think ..."
Are you saying he should have said "I think that think that..."?
Ew, that phrasing leaves such a bad taste in my mouth, nevermind all the English teachers who said never say/write "I think
If, yes then are you saying it takes no more than that to qualify as a non-idiot. Don't you think that's a bit silly?
Anyway, Dennis Miller Dennis Leary. QED.
Please say supeclaifragilisticexpialidocious or Mr. MXPLTSK backwards.
Sometimes it hurts to think, so I get the endorphine kick I need from sarcasm.
Go look it up.
I was merely taking your logical construction and replacing the variables. Okay so I stretched it.
Like so:
You said that the poster was claiming some sort of extrasensory perception because he used the word think, when in fact the word think can easily mean believe or something similar. Even my kids know that.
So I said that going by that logic, then Saddam Hussein's surrender would come becuase he somehow suddenly saw the light of truth_ver_1.0-US (does that hurt?), and not because of other reasons.
The bit about a true American yada yada, that's just me picking on Big Brother Bush and his otherthinkisbadthink (ouch!).
You know I'm still mad at you for calling that guy an idiot when you couldn't even parse the use of the word think. That kinda sticks out like a sore thumb, don't you think?
See now you made decompress my earlier post into this boring rant. Bad poster, bad, bad poster.
What's the use of Marketing anyways?
Just watch TV, imitate, repeat.
There are things that must be done on site even if it's a third party product.
They don't listen, tell em you'll report them.
Don't torture yourself trying to educate them.
But that's MY birthday :(
It's unnecesarry to seize the hard drive. Just copy the file.
This is only making people laugh. And feeleven less threatened to download.
If Saddam Hussein surrenders, does that make him an American, because only a true American would agree with the US' actions.
Idiot, n. one who lives his life in a dictionary. Example: One who cannot parse a conversation for meaning.
"Think" can mean "believe" and we can infer what people believe or think regardless of superficial acts pretending to make amends.
Or do you really think everyone whoever resigned for health reasons, resigned for health reasons?
I've got a new and improved bridge to sell you. Man, if only I had bid higher than Taco Bell on the Liberty Bell.
It's not the difference of opinion, it's the mix of arrogance and spinelessness of certain individuals (having lived in the US most of my life, I know what arrogance is when I see it).
I made a cheap shot because I saw the opportunity for a joke and to blow off some steam.
France has been rather ungrateful in various remarks and attitudes considering events that happened half a century ago.
If the story had been France is spaceworthy again, I probably would have stuck to that.
I also have some bones to pick with Europeans who get upset about our freedoms being supposedly so dangerous. Sure there's plenty of whiners in the US, but that's because they're ignorant. The North American continent is basically three countries, US, Canada, and Mexico. There aren't enough players on this piece of dirt to make any sort of alliance or conspiracy work.
Now Europe having seen war after war might have a reason to feel sensitive to violence and things associated with violence. But I could argue that it's quite the opposite. Having seen so much war, they should be able to tell the bloody difference between coordinated armed military assault and self-worth and defense against burglary and kidnapping of the random variety.
Incidentally, I think this war is frightening. Millions protest and no one in the news media tries to get in depth commentary. All we get is support Bush if you're a real American.
God damn filter.
Surely, you can rise above, "-I am phrase- afraid that -I am phrase again- -verb- to -verb- to -verb- you to -verb-."
Eek...
."
Surely, you can rise above " afraid that to to you
Reasons:
1. Bunch of ingrates
2. Tony Blair; there's only room for one GWB in this world
3. Trendy electronic music, wait is Aphex Twin from Europe? Damn!
The nationalist is the one who wouldn't leave so following your superficial logic he should be heard, or something. assuming one were so bored to follow that train of thought to its conclusion, a wreck.
Worst whine in the world:
"Hey shut up cuz I don't care really. I swear I don't care. Really, I don't care a single bit about this."
In diplomacyspeak that IS FUCK YOU!
Let me explain...
In the letter there is focus and detail and attention to the issue. At the end there are the vaporware words: seriousness, allegations, "this matter"
The president went from full-on point-by-point discussion to "Talk to the hand" vagueness.
That's Mr. Obvious, sir.
Anyway that's a problem because it's starting to look like QNX's resource manager approach makes portability unnecesary.
Rather than porting an app you just set up a service that other apps of the same type agree on.
Even if the world was coming to an end and this kind of inquisition was the only way to guarantee that a country would be the last one to have the sky fall on it, I wouldn't submit to it. Even if it were possible to reverse the end of the world this way. Even if there were no blatant contradictions in thes presumed usefulness of such an inquisition.
if that's all that's left for a society, we're already DEAD.
This is what I think of your cry baby logic.
1. I do not believe any entity is entitled to any "something that must be admissable", expecially one that does not accept that scenario. You are not trustworthy if cannot accept no for an answer.
2. What makes you think you're not the one wasting people's time?
3. A demonstration:
Enter Little Snivelling Investigator - a man who can't provide any useful service to the law enforcement industry and so precariously hanging onto fulfilling his intelligence quota to avoid getting fired that he harrasses anyone he can and devises ways of justifying his Inquisitions
Enter Big Voice - The transfigured to deity form of Superman, Gandhi, Crocodile Dundee, Ben Franklin, Marie Curie, Mother Teresa, Joan of Arc, Lara Croft, or whoever happens to be one's hero.
Little Snivelling Investigator:We want to see what kind of magazine you read.
Big Voice: Why?
LSI: The majority of terrorists are male.
BV: No.
LSI: Something must be admissable.
BV: What part of No don't you undestand?
and I suppose Newton got a substatial investment to develop calculus.
Companies aren't the only ones cap[bleof producing results.
Sure there's a question of research, but that isn't limited to companies carrying out the work.
Look at genetics. Celera took how many $millions to develop their database. They didn't invent the techniques. Then here comes a researcher with concerns about having access and rights to knowledge. He takes a hundred Pentium boxes, sets them to work, and in a short time using a small fraction of what it cost Celera, he creates a competing product.
Patents are outdated. They were made to encourage companies to take the cost of distribution and manufacturing. Long ago it was more costly to deliver a product than to invent and test it.
The problem was one of added cost in physical labor and materials which have a definite monetary value.
That's not the case anymore. The cost is greater in the engineering and knowledge phase both of which have social and personal value.
If I build a computer, it'll cost me X, and I charge X+Y to get my profit at the end of the day,
Engineering and research into new areas is like russian roulette, you can easily never discover anything and run out of money and you can easily
hit on a gold mine having spent very little.
Subsidizing the deficit in knowledge with cash is just plain gambling, and then you expect the rest of the world which needs (not wants) your product to maintain your habit when sharing the knowledge would clear everyone's deficit. Knowledge takes up no volume and costs infinitesimal amounts in cash compared to the gambling cost.
Go ahead patent some aphrodisiac, I could care less, it's omething people might want but hardly need, But don't come to me with your Economics 101 pedantics when things that are necessary are concerned.
If someone with a social concern can outdo a company two things come to mind:
1. What kind of idiots or worse greedy bastards does Celera employ?
2. How much more can someone who doesn't want to die do given they can reach any researcher they want if they do a little homework?
What emotional statements?
Research doesn't cure disease. The drugs do. Patents prohibit implementation of such drugs.
When I see "the free market is the only way" I wish there was a Godwins Law clause for it.
It's flawed for the following reason:
What does free market have to do with money?
Nothing. Zilch. Zip. Zero. The free market means the right to trade, not the entitlement to profit. A market that is anchored on laws beyond the concept of theft, laws which define new thefts, that market is not a free market, it is a sheltered market. A truly free market would have only the laws of physical property and laws of contracts in its context.
Plenty of people suffering from unsolved deadly diseases are banding together to get information and research and fund raisers.
I think the loss of an opportunity to make billions is sufficiently compensated by the desire of terminally ill people to beat their disease unless it's painful.
Your argument works for microchips and space shuttles but it trips all over itself when it comes to life and death.
Hmm...
Just how does one #include say solve.h which I wrote in C for solve.c which #include in Java.
So maybe I was wrong...
Still you can't link to a c library and produce a completely java product.
If you could I just might consider it. A java linux distro might be pretty cool.
But you can slow light down to 1/5.3x10-6 of it's original speed.
You can't link Java to gtk, gnome, kde, qt, or any other useful development base. I know there's CORBA, but that's so indirect compared to a direct link.
Until the bindings are possible, it's going to be a niche product.