I think the point was that we the common folk get to surrender our life savings, educations, cars homes, etc., while the CEO gets off just giving his kids a stern talkning-to (okay, he's a CEO so it qualifies as worse that the talking-to I got as a kid).
Actually from here 'Starkweather wrote the patent in 1996 for a Vermont inventor who originally didn't show interest in patenting the idea or understand its value. The concept consisted of a desktop computer holding multiple songs with an interface allowing a hotel guest to select three songs and play them on an electric grand piano. Starkweather saw the broader value and broke the patent into three elements; remote music storage, selection of music to download and playing music on a music device. Starkweather realized that downloading movies was an obvious variation to downloading music. It was data manipulated in the same way. "Sometimes it's easy to break an invention down to its key components," Starkweather says. "That's why patent writing is an art, not a science, and requires creativity."'
I would correct Starkweather's last statement to be "That's why patent writing is a dark art, and requires the surrender of all ethical bounds checking".
You and Bill Clinton seem to have the same problem with the word 'it'. It was a futile argument when he used it, and it is when you use it. Oh sorry, that sentence had the word 'it' in it four times, with no explicit definition. Oh damnit, I did it again. Okay, the 'i' word won't show up in this sentence. But maybe in others. Whatever "in" means.
I don't understand how the President has any say in whether or not I get a raise while working in IT
Because BG has publicly stated that if he could change laws he would remove the H1b visa cap. By flooding the US labor market with very cheap labor, wages would drop. You do the math.
you have some real issues.
Ad hominem is all but formally admitting you're wrong.
A criminally smart President doesn't mean a criminal President.
Yes, actually, it does. They're criminals because they don't 'keep it in check', and don't care about much except not getting caught.
If BG did become president and you work in IT, you can kiss any hope of a raise during his term goodbye. He won't, though, because he probably could never get the bible-kook neocon vote. They want someone who thinks the earth is 6500 years old, that 'their' god made everything up, everyone else's religion is wrong, and that the tooth fairy rewards kids who don't brush their teeth. And they all vote together.
Shi'as and Sunnis have been in a violent, often bloody, conflict since the death of Mohamed. Iraq has a sizable population of both.
Whoever thought that deposing a government in such a situation was ever winnable were the insane parties.
We seem to have no problem wining battles whatsoever. Making Iraq a safe place to live - the task we have taken on - that's a whole different ballgame.
She's not complaining about a 'lack of preferential treatment' - she's citing that the National Science Teacher's Association rejected an offer to provide free copies of the movie to classrooms, for fear of losing money from Exxon.
From the above link:
The producers of An Inconvenient Truth have offered to supply American classrooms with 50,000 copies of the movie free of charge. That offer has been rejected by the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA), the nation's leading science education teachers group, citing a risk to funding from key financial supporters.
One of those supporters is Exxon-Mobil.
Or if that's not enough, how about this from NSTA directly:"Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place "unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters."
What is more suspicious is that the scientist who supposedly reproduced this work, Kodama, happens to be the same one who did the original work. He has just changed labs. Maybe this is why the JDRF is not funding this work. It has yet to be shown to work by anyone other than the original authors.
Didn't Faustman do the work in this and the original studies? It seem odd that nobody else has tried to reproduce such promising research.
Maybe MS already thought about this, and this was just the sneakiest way to stick it to Novell - get them to purchase their own demise from an old enemy.
For an animal to allow itself to go into an extremely vulnerable state every day for hours
I had a job sleeping for a while - yes the position was designated as a sleep-over. I only had to wake up to restrain a psychopathic autistic individual who ostensibly slept in his room at night on my shift (his door wasn't locked ever - against the rules). Trust me, sleeping isn't as vulnerable as one might at first think. He never surprised me.
Plus, somehow many wild species sleep and survive.
Actually, as a friend of mine once said, "you can't argue people into believing what you believe." It might be more useful to point out that they themselves change the modes with which they interpret the bible. In some places, they claim not to be 'interpreting' it - they say they're just 'reading it' when they quote passages which say the only way to heaven or to be 'saved' is to believe in jesus. Yet in other places they don't take scriptures so literally. Good examples are Deut 23:1 that says you can't go to church with damaged testicles or if your penis has been cut off and Deut 23:2 that says if you're a bastard (even ten generations out) you can't go to church. Also, god is powerless against automobiles (iron chariots) - Judges 1:19. fundamentalists will claim that you can violate Old Testament laws all you want, and Christ's sacrifice will deliver you from judgment if you believe in him. Yet, Christ said that not one bit of OT law will be given exception to - Matt 5:17-19. In other places, christ's sacrifice does supersede OT laws - Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6. Do OT laws still hold? Or not? If I hit god with my subaru, will he be able to get back up?
Those are just theological contradictions. Then there are places where a story is told one way and accounted for differently in another. In Matthew, christ was taken into egypt (Matt 2:14,15,19,21,23) but in Luke he wasen't (Luke 2:22, 39). In Matthew, jesus gave the beatitudes on a mountainside (Matt 5:1,2) and in Luke he gave the beatitudes on a plain (Luke 6:17,20). The list of course goes on and on. The point is that fundamentalists and evangelicals take the bible as a unified authority and believe its contents have been carefully arranged by god to tell us how to live and what to believe. And just by reading it, this isn't the case which pokes holes in their claims to the be the only true religion, and in most of the founding theology they live by. You can't let them get away with "we're not interpreting the bible - we're just reading it factually." (which they'll fall back on to avoid complex theological discussions) Point out they do in fact interpret the bible, and their is just one on many interpretations. You might even need to point out that the bible wasn't even written in english or even one language, so by definition they are reading an interpretation. There are lots of good examples of contradictions at evilbible.com.
AC said:"And you misunderstand me. I don't really care if you believe in evolution or not. The attitude of "your brain is smaller and your less intelligent because you don't believe in evolution" is total crap.
The pompous attitude of some of you people tick me off."
The study also supports a somewhat controversial idea in biology: Animals' behavior in response to environmental change can spur evolutionary adaptations.
Could that imply that the behaviour of disbelieving scientific facts could spur a reduction in brain size in order to adapt to reduced intelligence?
"Why they wouldn't they release? Well, my post you replied to has a "overrated" punishment/moderation, it could be the reason."
The overrated moderation is a such a pointless mod given the nature of/. as a site, even more so since it doesn't get metamodded (that I've ever seen). I still don't get the connection between getting some overrated moddings and the 'why wouldn't they release' part however. The 'almost all' assertion also seems a bit much as well (probably what caught the eye of the modbots). Almost all of what you've encountered makes more sense.
Still apache must seem to bear the larger numbers of phished sites just the same. I agree - I think there are plenty of linux site admins and web developers/builders who get lulled into a false sense of security by the OS's track record being better than window's security track record. They may not see that being better at security than windows is just being better than something really bad - it doesn't say that you're really good or that you can take security for granted.
Slashdot Mirror
I think the point was that we the common folk get to surrender our life savings, educations, cars homes, etc., while the CEO gets off just giving his kids a stern talkning-to (okay, he's a CEO so it qualifies as worse that the talking-to I got as a kid).
The rest of us get to eat cake, it would seem.
Actually from here 'Starkweather wrote the patent in 1996 for a Vermont inventor who originally didn't show interest in patenting the idea or understand its value. The concept consisted of a desktop computer holding multiple songs with an interface allowing a hotel guest to select three songs and play them on an electric grand piano. Starkweather saw the broader value and broke the patent into three elements; remote music storage, selection of music to download and playing music on a music device. Starkweather realized that downloading movies was an obvious variation to downloading music. It was data manipulated in the same way. "Sometimes it's easy to break an invention down to its key components," Starkweather says. "That's why patent writing is an art, not a science, and requires creativity."'
I would correct Starkweather's last statement to be "That's why patent writing is a dark art, and requires the surrender of all ethical bounds checking".
Well, I don't think the sky would fall either - just IT wages in the US. It could end up being as good as it might be bad.
(whatever "it" is)
You and Bill Clinton seem to have the same problem with the word 'it'. It was a futile argument when he used it, and it is when you use it. Oh sorry, that sentence had the word 'it' in it four times, with no explicit definition. Oh damnit, I did it again. Okay, the 'i' word won't show up in this sentence. But maybe in others. Whatever "in" means.
I don't understand how the President has any say in whether or not I get a raise while working in IT
Because BG has publicly stated that if he could change laws he would remove the H1b visa cap. By flooding the US labor market with very cheap labor, wages would drop. You do the math.
you have some real issues.
Ad hominem is all but formally admitting you're wrong.
One word (term) for why he shouldn't - H1B
A criminally smart President doesn't mean a criminal President.
Yes, actually, it does. They're criminals because they don't 'keep it in check', and don't care about much except not getting caught.
If BG did become president and you work in IT, you can kiss any hope of a raise during his term goodbye. He won't, though, because he probably could never get the bible-kook neocon vote. They want someone who thinks the earth is 6500 years old, that 'their' god made everything up, everyone else's religion is wrong, and that the tooth fairy rewards kids who don't brush their teeth. And they all vote together.
Clouds above bench part...
"Stop groveling! I hate it when people grovel!"
Shi'as and Sunnis have been in a violent, often bloody, conflict since the death of Mohamed. Iraq has a sizable population of both.
Whoever thought that deposing a government in such a situation was ever winnable were the insane parties.
We seem to have no problem wining battles whatsoever. Making Iraq a safe place to live - the task we have taken on - that's a whole different ballgame.
All...?!
AC/DC has been doing it for awhile.
From the above link:
Or if that's not enough, how about this from NSTA directly:"Accepting the DVDs, they wrote, would place "unnecessary risk upon the [NSTA] capital campaign, especially certain targeted supporters."
Me - 1
What is more suspicious is that the scientist who supposedly reproduced this work, Kodama, happens to be the same one who did the original work. He has just changed labs. Maybe this is why the JDRF is not funding this work. It has yet to be shown to work by anyone other than the original authors.
Didn't Faustman do the work in this and the original studies? It seem odd that nobody else has tried to reproduce such promising research.
Then other scientists couldn't repeat the findings.
Which other scientists (just curious)? What's suspicious about all this is that JRDF, which will throw money at everything from new implantable device research to stem cell research won't fund research into Denise Faustman's legitimate breakthrough discovery. Could it be because her discovery involve a cheap drug whose patent has expired?
Maybe MS already thought about this, and this was just the sneakiest way to stick it to Novell - get them to purchase their own demise from an old enemy.
And lo, the Lord appeared and said onto them:
And stop groveling! It's always sorry this and forgive me that. And those miserable psalms, they're so depressing!
"Brown also sees the chips ultimately replacing batteries altogether."
Especially if implanted in people. From birth. In vast crops...
Plus, somehow many wild species sleep and survive.
Actually, as a friend of mine once said, "you can't argue people into believing what you believe." It might be more useful to point out that they themselves change the modes with which they interpret the bible. In some places, they claim not to be 'interpreting' it - they say they're just 'reading it' when they quote passages which say the only way to heaven or to be 'saved' is to believe in jesus. Yet in other places they don't take scriptures so literally. Good examples are Deut 23:1 that says you can't go to church with damaged testicles or if your penis has been cut off and Deut 23:2 that says if you're a bastard (even ten generations out) you can't go to church. Also, god is powerless against automobiles (iron chariots) - Judges 1:19. fundamentalists will claim that you can violate Old Testament laws all you want, and Christ's sacrifice will deliver you from judgment if you believe in him. Yet, Christ said that not one bit of OT law will be given exception to - Matt 5:17-19. In other places, christ's sacrifice does supersede OT laws - Luke 16:16/ Eph 2:15/ Rom 7:6. Do OT laws still hold? Or not? If I hit god with my subaru, will he be able to get back up?
Those are just theological contradictions. Then there are places where a story is told one way and accounted for differently in another. In Matthew, christ was taken into egypt (Matt 2:14,15,19,21,23) but in Luke he wasen't (Luke 2:22, 39). In Matthew, jesus gave the beatitudes on a mountainside (Matt 5:1,2) and in Luke he gave the beatitudes on a plain (Luke 6:17,20). The list of course goes on and on. The point is that fundamentalists and evangelicals take the bible as a unified authority and believe its contents have been carefully arranged by god to tell us how to live and what to believe. And just by reading it, this isn't the case which pokes holes in their claims to the be the only true religion, and in most of the founding theology they live by. You can't let them get away with "we're not interpreting the bible - we're just reading it factually." (which they'll fall back on to avoid complex theological discussions) Point out they do in fact interpret the bible, and their is just one on many interpretations. You might even need to point out that the bible wasn't even written in english or even one language, so by definition they are reading an interpretation. There are lots of good examples of contradictions at evilbible.com.
That Steve forgot to take his anti-psychotic medications that day.
Massive PR Damage - Undone!
Problem - Solved!
The firm also undertook hundreds of thousands of hours of lab research
I had no idea those little white rats liked using Word. . .
10 years or the next presidential election - whichever comes first
AC said:"And you misunderstand me. I don't really care if you believe in evolution or not. The attitude of "your brain is smaller and your less intelligent because you don't believe in evolution" is total crap.
The pompous attitude of some of you people tick me off."
Actually, that wasen't his attitude, it was mine.
The study also supports a somewhat controversial idea in biology: Animals' behavior in response to environmental change can spur evolutionary adaptations.
Could that imply that the behaviour of disbelieving scientific facts could spur a reduction in brain size in order to adapt to reduced intelligence?
Politicians being ignorant of voters and technology might be fueling what politicians think is a crisis.
"Why they wouldn't they release? Well, my post you replied to has a "overrated" punishment/moderation, it could be the reason."
/. as a site, even more so since it doesn't get metamodded (that I've ever seen). I still don't get the connection between getting some overrated moddings and the 'why wouldn't they release' part however. The 'almost all' assertion also seems a bit much as well (probably what caught the eye of the modbots). Almost all of what you've encountered makes more sense.
The overrated moderation is a such a pointless mod given the nature of
Still apache must seem to bear the larger numbers of phished sites just the same. I agree - I think there are plenty of linux site admins and web developers/builders who get lulled into a false sense of security by the OS's track record being better than window's security track record. They may not see that being better at security than windows is just being better than something really bad - it doesn't say that you're really good or that you can take security for granted.