So what do you do? Do you just not reveal yourself as creator until they've figured these things out?
I would pick some tiny, obscure tribe on the edge of a desert as my "Chosen People", and the rest can just burn in Hell for all eternity. It's kind of like a "tough love" approach, with a less polite word substituted for "love".
It is assumed that God knows our choices already, but that doesn't mean he has determined them, only that he knows the choices we are going to make.
So you're trying to choose between a bowl of ice cream and a nice salad. The fact that you are going to choose the ice cream was carved in stone over 4 billion years ago, but you think that you have the "freedom" to choose the salad? That belief is kind of sweet in a really sad way.
Given that the keyboard is made for children (i.e. it's small), I'm not sure that it would be a good computer for adults..
It has USB ports, so add a full-sized keyboard for serious work. When that's not possible, you can console yourself with the knowledge that most notebook keyboards suck.
If they wanted to support F/OSS, they could have done so, but no, they wanted to keep using Windows for free.
This guy is a school administrator, not a tech. He probably doesn't know what "software" is; he bought a computer. It's like you bought a refrigerator, and six months later, someone tells you that the freon inside the compressor is violating someone's intellectual property rights (but don't worry, you won't need a refrigerator in Siberia).
I doubt that he knows about F/OSS, and he probably didn't know about Microsoft until the prosecutor charged him.
It also strikes me as absurd, that I can buy a DVD of a movie in a store for $10-$20, and look over to the left and see a CD of the soundtrack for that movie for $18. Did all those people who took the pretty moving pictures cost nothing? Were the actors free? How can the soundtrack be considered to have equal value to the entire movie?
the touch screen systems help get you around the problems of parallax, or much of the confusion that landed Pat Buchannon so many votes in 2000.
The optical-scan machines can also prevent the Buchanan problem. The biggest problem was people voting for Gore and Buchanan for President (the layout of the ballot was confusing and illegal). All of the optical-scan machines that I have heard of will automatically kick-back your ballot with an error message, if you vote for two different candidates for the same race. True, the touch screen machines keep you from selecting both candidates at all, but since the optical-scan machine catches your mistake and forces you to correct the mistake, the effect is similar.
How you handle under-votes is still a question. Maybe it was the voter's decision not to vote in that race; maybe it was an oversight (or not-completely-filled-in circle). I think that the voter should be required to choose a "Declined" or "Not voting" option for any race that they don't want to choose a candidate. The optical-scan machines should then kick-back any ballot that doesn't have a choice (or "Declined") in every race. One of our Florida counties still has a fight about the last election, where 18000 voters either decided not to vote for the House of Representatives seat, or their votes for that one race were silently eaten by the machine.
There is no need to discuss your political leanings with poll workers
That is true in the 'final' election, but here in Florida we have 'closed primaries'. When you registered to vote, you chose a party (I guess N/A is an option). When you show up at the polls, the poll worker looks-up your party affiliation, so that they know which ballot to give you. Only Dems get to vote for Dems, only Reps get to vote for Reps.
One exception: if the primary is going to decide the election (e.g. 2 Reps running for dog catcher, no Dem challenger) then everyone gets to vote on that one race in the primary.
At the end of the election you print out the totals.
Printing out the totals at the end isn't really good enough. How do you re-count a total? You don't. I want to see it marked who I voted-for, on the piece of paper, and I want all of those pieces of paper retained for several months after the election so that they can be re-counted by optical scanners and by hand, if necessary.
Of course I own the courthouse, in at least one sense - it's public property.
As public property, you do not own it. You do not own a 1/300,000,000th share of it. It is held in common, which is a different thing that you owning it in whole or in part.
it's public property. If the public wants a Christmas tree on it, the ACLU will fight against that.
But see "the public" doesn't want a Christmas tree on it. Maybe 76% of the public (that's the percentage of Americans who claim to be Christian) want a Christmas tree on it, but that is not the same as "the public want[ing] a Christmas tree on it." And from that 76%, remove the Christians who endorse a separation of Church and State.
I'm not saying the ACLU is right or wrong to do so, but it is a right that the ACLU opposes.
Even if "the public" did want a Christmas tree in the courthouse, we can't have it. The courthouse is public property whose governance is defined and limited by the Constitution. The Constitution specifically forbids the Establishment of a state religion. We the people are precluded from giving preference to one religion in our collective role as Government. So your statement that "it is a right that the ACLU opposes" is not correct. It is rather a non-right that the ACLU opposes, thus preserving the civil rights of all Americans, and preserving the Constitution itself.
such as my right to put up a Christmas tree at the courthouse
The problem with your complaint is that the courthouse is not yours to decorate. The courthouse belongs to everyone, including the non-Christians. Do you think that you have a right to put up a Christmas tree on my property?
When the ACLU tries to take away your right to put up a Christmas tree (or menora, pentacle, etc) on your own property, or on your church's property, give me a call and I will join you in condemning them.
If I knew that these 'allied' forces were likely to grab me from my home, hold me incommunicado for 5+ years without evidence or trial, keep my wellbeing from being monitored by international observers, and subject me to 'torture light' at the whim of some foreign devil, you can bet your sweet ass that I would 'engage' them on sight.
Aside from the other well-reasoned responses (as to why the ACLU does not handle 2nd Amendment cases), here is another reason that they may or may not admit to: there is a larger and better-funded organization called the NRA, that works to promote the right (whether is exists or not) of individuals to own 'arms'. Why should the ACLU give equal time and money to protect the 2nd Amendment, when there is one organization whose lawyers are already dedicated solely to that one Amendment?
What kind of an idiot gives their grandmother the root password to her box?
(note that we are using 'grandmother' as code for a user who does not want to learn to admin a box; any real grandmothers out there who are qualified to admin a box...we are not talking about you)
Re:It doesn't have to be zero sum
on
Water From Wind
·
· Score: 1
Here is Florida, we typically get one hour of hard rainfall (3pm-4pm) every day in the summer. Unfortunately, the ground can't soak-up that much water, that quickly, so most of it runs into streams and lakes (and our man-made "drainage retention areas"). Any water that we take out of the air before the 3pm downpour could be used more effectively, even if it is just dumped onto fields slowly.
I call BS. Darwin's theory of purging the gene pool requires that people lack common sense.
No, common sense is not part of Darwin's theory. Natural selection is based on an organism's fitness to its environment. Since these people live in an environment that includes microwave ovens, sponges, and Reuters, their ability to interact with these elements without removing themselves from the gene pool is part of being 'fit' for their environment.
Google Executive says, "You should use our products."
That's probably a good statement for a Google exec to make. After all, their mission statement doesn't say, "Don't be smart." or "Don't be profitable."
THE EARTH REVOLVES AROUND THE SUN?? You must be joking. I can clearly see the sun rising and setting. Any theory that interferes with the perceptions that I am comfortable with, is obviously bollocks. Last time I checked I couldn't see any evidence for the earth revolving around the sun, even when looking under the sofa.
Slashdot Mirror
I would pick some tiny, obscure tribe on the edge of a desert as my "Chosen People", and the rest can just burn in Hell for all eternity. It's kind of like a "tough love" approach, with a less polite word substituted for "love".
Don't be so simplistic. I am willing to entertain the idea that Microsoft is merely an earthly manifestation of a transcendent evil.
So you're trying to choose between a bowl of ice cream and a nice salad. The fact that you are going to choose the ice cream was carved in stone over 4 billion years ago, but you think that you have the "freedom" to choose the salad? That belief is kind of sweet in a really sad way.
It has USB ports, so add a full-sized keyboard for serious work. When that's not possible, you can console yourself with the knowledge that most notebook keyboards suck.
Xerox did it first.
This guy is a school administrator, not a tech. He probably doesn't know what "software" is; he bought a computer. It's like you bought a refrigerator, and six months later, someone tells you that the freon inside the compressor is violating someone's intellectual property rights (but don't worry, you won't need a refrigerator in Siberia).
I doubt that he knows about F/OSS, and he probably didn't know about Microsoft until the prosecutor charged him.
Only if you have more money than I do.
It also strikes me as absurd, that I can buy a DVD of a movie in a store for $10-$20, and look over to the left and see a CD of the soundtrack for that movie for $18. Did all those people who took the pretty moving pictures cost nothing? Were the actors free? How can the soundtrack be considered to have equal value to the entire movie?
Excuse me sir, but did you read the summary at the top of this page? I don't mean RTFA, just the summary.
That's been done to death, all the dumb claims have been answered, and people still continue spreading the myths.
If by 'people' who are spreading 'myths', you meant Microsoft officially warning their customers about 'risks', then I guess you're right.
That's odd; this guy's staff seems to have a knob on both ends.
The optical-scan machines can also prevent the Buchanan problem. The biggest problem was people voting for Gore and Buchanan for President (the layout of the ballot was confusing and illegal). All of the optical-scan machines that I have heard of will automatically kick-back your ballot with an error message, if you vote for two different candidates for the same race. True, the touch screen machines keep you from selecting both candidates at all, but since the optical-scan machine catches your mistake and forces you to correct the mistake, the effect is similar.
How you handle under-votes is still a question. Maybe it was the voter's decision not to vote in that race; maybe it was an oversight (or not-completely-filled-in circle). I think that the voter should be required to choose a "Declined" or "Not voting" option for any race that they don't want to choose a candidate. The optical-scan machines should then kick-back any ballot that doesn't have a choice (or "Declined") in every race. One of our Florida counties still has a fight about the last election, where 18000 voters either decided not to vote for the House of Representatives seat, or their votes for that one race were silently eaten by the machine.
No, Switzerland is neutral.
That is true in the 'final' election, but here in Florida we have 'closed primaries'. When you registered to vote, you chose a party (I guess N/A is an option). When you show up at the polls, the poll worker looks-up your party affiliation, so that they know which ballot to give you. Only Dems get to vote for Dems, only Reps get to vote for Reps.
One exception: if the primary is going to decide the election (e.g. 2 Reps running for dog catcher, no Dem challenger) then everyone gets to vote on that one race in the primary.
Printing out the totals at the end isn't really good enough. How do you re-count a total? You don't. I want to see it marked who I voted-for, on the piece of paper, and I want all of those pieces of paper retained for several months after the election so that they can be re-counted by optical scanners and by hand, if necessary.
As public property, you do not own it. You do not own a 1/300,000,000th share of it. It is held in common, which is a different thing that you owning it in whole or in part.
it's public property. If the public wants a Christmas tree on it, the ACLU will fight against that.
But see "the public" doesn't want a Christmas tree on it. Maybe 76% of the public (that's the percentage of Americans who claim to be Christian) want a Christmas tree on it, but that is not the same as "the public want[ing] a Christmas tree on it." And from that 76%, remove the Christians who endorse a separation of Church and State.
I'm not saying the ACLU is right or wrong to do so, but it is a right that the ACLU opposes.
Even if "the public" did want a Christmas tree in the courthouse, we can't have it. The courthouse is public property whose governance is defined and limited by the Constitution. The Constitution specifically forbids the Establishment of a state religion. We the people are precluded from giving preference to one religion in our collective role as Government. So your statement that "it is a right that the ACLU opposes" is not correct. It is rather a non-right that the ACLU opposes, thus preserving the civil rights of all Americans, and preserving the Constitution itself.
The problem with your complaint is that the courthouse is not yours to decorate. The courthouse belongs to everyone, including the non-Christians. Do you think that you have a right to put up a Christmas tree on my property?
When the ACLU tries to take away your right to put up a Christmas tree (or menora, pentacle, etc) on your own property, or on your church's property, give me a call and I will join you in condemning them.
If I knew that these 'allied' forces were likely to grab me from my home, hold me incommunicado for 5+ years without evidence or trial, keep my wellbeing from being monitored by international observers, and subject me to 'torture light' at the whim of some foreign devil, you can bet your sweet ass that I would 'engage' them on sight.
Aside from the other well-reasoned responses (as to why the ACLU does not handle 2nd Amendment cases), here is another reason that they may or may not admit to: there is a larger and better-funded organization called the NRA, that works to promote the right (whether is exists or not) of individuals to own 'arms'. Why should the ACLU give equal time and money to protect the 2nd Amendment, when there is one organization whose lawyers are already dedicated solely to that one Amendment?
(note that we are using 'grandmother' as code for a user who does not want to learn to admin a box; any real grandmothers out there who are qualified to admin a box...we are not talking about you)
Here is Florida, we typically get one hour of hard rainfall (3pm-4pm) every day in the summer. Unfortunately, the ground can't soak-up that much water, that quickly, so most of it runs into streams and lakes (and our man-made "drainage retention areas"). Any water that we take out of the air before the 3pm downpour could be used more effectively, even if it is just dumped onto fields slowly.
It's dinosaurs all the way down.
No, common sense is not part of Darwin's theory. Natural selection is based on an organism's fitness to its environment. Since these people live in an environment that includes microwave ovens, sponges, and Reuters, their ability to interact with these elements without removing themselves from the gene pool is part of being 'fit' for their environment.
That's probably a good statement for a Google exec to make. After all, their mission statement doesn't say, "Don't be smart." or "Don't be profitable."
THE EARTH REVOLVES AROUND THE SUN?? You must be joking. I can clearly see the sun rising and setting. Any theory that interferes with the perceptions that I am comfortable with, is obviously bollocks. Last time I checked I couldn't see any evidence for the earth revolving around the sun, even when looking under the sofa.
And lots of compilation CDs.