As far as CBS's withdrawls from the Bush memos, well, do you not think that this is pretty much the ultimate slam on CBS' news division? I do. Not much more needs to be done with that. We will always now take whatever CBS and Dan Rather might have to say with a huge grain of salt.
Not really. They got the story right. They had a different piece of paper than they thought they did, but the words on the paper were the same ones that were on the "real" memo.
The fact that it has been twisted to be about the memo rather than about the actual legitimate story is what is truly sickening.
Yeah, eerie isn't it? This is CIA bag of tricks crap being used on the US public.
Well, remember that they tried to actually set up a government department dedicated to doing just this? There was outrage, and so it "went away". Things like that don't go away.
What happens if Bush is reelected and the Christians get what they want, outlawing abortion? Further, what if they win an anti-gay marriage constitutional ammendment? Or prayer in schools? OK... so they win these few hot button issues, then what? IMO, that faction of the party will disolve, having met their goals,
No, they won't stop there. They wlll then push for mandatory prayer in school. They will push for turning America into a fundamentalist theocracy.
Now, the "they" here will be getting smaller as more of these things pass, but the people pushing the hardest are extremist zealots and they will not rest until they strip away all freedoms not supported by their particular extremist interpretation of the bible.
Now, the GOP might peter out, or it might schism, but I don't forsee that happening before a lot more damage is done. I think this is extremely likely for the same reason the Dems are currently blackballing Nader.
That would give the Dems an advantage, and a lot of these people, especially the elected officials, but lots of Republican (and Democrat) voters have far more loyalty to their party than they do to their country.
Pres. Bush is no longer a young man, and no longer is irresponsible. I respect Pres. Bush as a man, but not as a leader.
You can not both support the war in Iraq and tax breaks without leaving the costs for our children. Is your selfish desire to acquire more money worth more to you than the soldiers fighting in Iraq or the kids that will have to eventual pay for our short sidedness?
OK, the cognitive dissonance is killing me.
How are the things you talked about not irresponsible?
How can you respect a person who would do those things?
Sure, Fox tends to lean to the right, but how do you explain the lackadaisial coverage of CBS's BLATENT Kerry supporting with their little memo scandal?
Fox isn't even to the right. They are the propaganda wing of the Republcan party.
So tell me, why were they in such a hurry to put the story of the memos out?
Because it is a huge story? The actual memos were just icing. The story itself was vetted, and still stands up to all scrutiny.
The memo issue wasn't "Kerry supporting". That just shows how far out of touch you are. When the facts show your guy in a negative light, that isn't partisanship, they are the facts.
Don't mod me down as a flamebait again, just because you don't see it my way. I am just bringing up some legit points here.
No, your points are not legitimats, because you are dancing around a trivial side issue rather than the actual story.
Why the hell you think it's a "scandal" is beyond me as well. They didn't have the actual piece of paper which was typed up, but that doesn't change the fact that a paper with the same words on it was typed up. I suppose you completely blocked out the fact that Dan Rather interviewed the secretary who actually typed the memo. She said that the paper he showed her was not the one she typed, but that she did type memos wth the *exact same words* on them.
Whether or not the paper he had was the exact same piece of paper is irrelevant to the story, although it does show that they should vet things a little better. The story would still stand regardless of whether he even had any pieces of paper at all.
So, you are spitting out the same talking points you were given by Fox or Rush or Hannity or whoever not that it matters because they all tell the same story that they were given to tell: It's about a memo.
No. The very real and critically important story is that Bush did not show up for duty. Nothing in this made up "scandal" changes that fact.
Now, the fact that you are seeing a liberal bias in facts indicates that you are not interested in facts or the truth. What you are interested in is beyond me, although my best guess would be that admitting you were mistaken in your beliefs about Bush is something you can't do.
That is sad and it is not the acton of a decent American or a decent citizen of a free society.
A processor with 20 stages will lose ~ twice as many cycles on a branch missprediction
I assume branch prediction means that it tries to guess which way an "if" will go?
If so, what are the usual techniques?
branch prediction is in the 95+% range now
That sounds pretty damn good. Is there any sort of common wisdom about certain languages, algorithms, coding styles etc. that can make this better or worse?
The mantra of most of the media these days is basically "maximum sales, minimum effort". Researching the facts, using statistics correctly - these take effort and don't sell papers/advertising time.
It's even more complicated than that.
Maximizing sales means, in the case of NBC, maximizing profits for GE.
Now if they can help sell a war then they can help sell billions in weapons which is more than they make in advertizing. So they, in fact, did just that. It's similar just with different playeres for all of the other networks.
Researching facts isn't even an issue. They can know full well that the "facts" aren't facts yet they will report the lies anyway. They, in fact, have a legal responsibility to do so if it will help mazimize shareholder value.
The sad thing about the freedom of the press that these vultures hide behind is that they are free to do just that.
This is one of the main reasons I get all my news from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. At least then I know it's all fake.:)
The really sad thing is that this show is the only major "news" program in the country that actually does call bullshit on the most obvious lies told by public figures.
Now, is that lying? Probably not, but it's dishonest.
Absolutely 100% yes it is a lie.
Saying "There is some evidence that such and such is true" could well be a true statement.
Saying "Such and such is absolutely true and can and will kill you within 45 minutes" when you know full well that you don't know it is true is absolutely a lie.
The fact that it was done with the explicit intention of misleading people in the interests of murdering 10s of thousands of people makes it far far worse than a simple and well-intentioned lie like: Santa Claus brings you those presents.
The valid point is that this whole argument is about restricting access to certain materials because *some* people feel that the content is not appropriate due to violence and/or sex.
The Bible contains these same things and to some extent much more of them and much more extreme.
Hence the same exact argument they are using to restrict access to video games, if valid, would demonstrate that the bible should be restricted as well.
Now, either you agree that access to the bible should be restricted, or there is something wrong with the argument in favor of restricting access to video games.
No, it is not a tool for the parent to use. It is a restriction forced on everybody because some whiny little bitches are stupid enough to have kids that they are not willing to raise properly.
If you have a kid who you consider too young to play a videogame, and they manage to get it installed on your computer, then you are an incompetent parent. That is a tool for a parent to use: Being aware of what the fuck your kids are doing.
Most people are adults. By trying to drag all of society down to a child's level, you are saying that you are incompetent to raise your own kids and you are placing the burden on the rest of us.
When you do this, don't be surprised when more and more of your rights and responsibilities as a parent are taken away.
Maybe society should force your kid to follow some particular religion (which one doesn't matter for this example as long as it's different than yours)? Why not? It's a good and moral one I assure you.
You can't be with your kid at all times to protect them from the dangers of all the "wrong" ones out there.
Dude. It was widely reported and admitted that the CIA did not agree with the threat assessment.
Are you seriously trying to claim that never happened? Insane.
've never seen such hatemongering and political venom in my entire life as I've seen from the left wingers these past few years.
Let's see. The right has been increasingly attacking anybody who disagrees with them as traitors, criminals and terrorist sympathisers. They own talk radio and all of the major media, so there is no hint of a centrist viewpoint to be heard on the news.
They are committing treason on a massive scale (stolen elections, wars started on completely made up pretenses, attempting for the first time in history to pass an amendment to create greater discrimination and restrict freedom, passing the Patriot act which outlaws patriotism and just for the hell of it prevents parents for suing a company if their fucking products give their children autism)
The simple fact is that hating the right wing slime is the only possible position of a patriot. They are cowards and they are traitors.
Try and refute that simple fact without your lies, and with some actual facts at your disposal you ignorant fuckhole.
It would also be nice if this safety tag was unobtrusive. I had a written job offer rescinded because the employer found out that I was going to get a transplant, so now I go out of my way to "hide" my condition from potential employers.
But is there any reason to believe that this information will not be given to potential employers?
Keep in mind that everything like this is done by business for the benefit of business.
You will find it *much* harder to keep your condition to yourself when this kind of thing goes live.
Slashdot Mirror
As far as CBS's withdrawls from the Bush memos, well, do you not think that this is pretty much the ultimate slam on CBS' news division? I do. Not much more needs to be done with that. We will always now take whatever CBS and Dan Rather might have to say with a huge grain of salt.
Not really. They got the story right. They had a different piece of paper than they thought they did, but the words on the paper were the same ones that were on the "real" memo.
The fact that it has been twisted to be about the memo rather than about the actual legitimate story is what is truly sickening.
Yeah, eerie isn't it? This is CIA bag of tricks crap being used on the US public.
Well, remember that they tried to actually set up a government department dedicated to doing just this?
There was outrage, and so it "went away". Things like that don't go away.
What happens if Bush is reelected and the Christians get what they want, outlawing abortion? Further, what if they win an anti-gay marriage constitutional ammendment? Or prayer in schools? OK... so they win these few hot button issues, then what? IMO, that faction of the party will disolve, having met their goals,
No, they won't stop there.
They wlll then push for mandatory prayer in school.
They will push for turning America into a fundamentalist theocracy.
Now, the "they" here will be getting smaller as more of these things pass, but the people pushing the hardest are extremist zealots and they will not rest until they strip away all freedoms not supported by their particular extremist interpretation of the bible.
Now, the GOP might peter out, or it might schism, but I don't forsee that happening before a lot more damage is done.
I think this is extremely likely for the same reason the Dems are currently blackballing Nader.
That would give the Dems an advantage, and a lot of these people, especially the elected officials, but lots of Republican (and Democrat) voters have far more loyalty to their party than they do to their country.
Pres. Bush is no longer a young man, and no longer is irresponsible.
I respect Pres. Bush as a man, but not as a leader.
You can not both support the war in Iraq and tax breaks without leaving the costs for our children. Is your selfish desire to acquire more money worth more to you than the soldiers fighting in Iraq or the kids that will have to eventual pay for our short sidedness?
OK, the cognitive dissonance is killing me.
How are the things you talked about not irresponsible?
How can you respect a person who would do those things?
Sure, Fox tends to lean to the right, but how do you explain the lackadaisial coverage of CBS's BLATENT Kerry supporting with their little memo scandal?
Fox isn't even to the right. They are the propaganda wing of the Republcan party.
So tell me, why were they in such a hurry to put the story of the memos out?
Because it is a huge story? The actual memos were just icing. The story itself was vetted, and still stands up to all scrutiny.
The memo issue wasn't "Kerry supporting". That just shows how far out of touch you are. When the facts show your guy in a negative light, that isn't partisanship, they are the facts.
Don't mod me down as a flamebait again, just because you don't see it my way. I am just bringing up some legit points here.
No, your points are not legitimats, because you are dancing around a trivial side issue rather than the actual story.
Why the hell you think it's a "scandal" is beyond me as well.
They didn't have the actual piece of paper which was typed up, but that doesn't change the fact that a paper with the same words on it was typed up. I suppose you completely blocked out the fact that Dan Rather interviewed the secretary who actually typed the memo. She said that the paper he showed her was not the one she typed, but that she did type memos wth the *exact same words* on them.
Whether or not the paper he had was the exact same piece of paper is irrelevant to the story, although it does show that they should vet things a little better. The story would still stand regardless of whether he even had any pieces of paper at all.
So, you are spitting out the same talking points you were given by Fox or Rush or Hannity or whoever not that it matters because they all tell the same story that they were given to tell:
It's about a memo.
No. The very real and critically important story is that Bush did not show up for duty. Nothing in this made up "scandal" changes that fact.
Now, the fact that you are seeing a liberal bias in facts indicates that you are not interested in facts or the truth. What you are interested in is beyond me, although my best guess would be that admitting you were mistaken in your beliefs about Bush is something you can't do.
That is sad and it is not the acton of a decent American or a decent citizen of a free society.
I laughed so hard that milk shot out of my nose!
I think I'll pass on drinking that milk too.
even though you need an electron microscope to actually tell the difference.
Isn't this because DeBeers legislated that synthetic diamonds had to have identifiers put in them, or is there actually a real difference?
how VIA could stay in business so long selling such poor products is beyond me
Question.
I've used machines with VIA chipsets all the way from a 386 to an Athlon64 and they've *all* been dodgy
Answer.
A processor with 20 stages will lose ~ twice as many cycles on a branch missprediction
I assume branch prediction means that it tries to guess which way an "if" will go?
If so, what are the usual techniques?
branch prediction is in the 95+% range now
That sounds pretty damn good.
Is there any sort of common wisdom about certain languages, algorithms, coding styles etc. that can make this better or worse?
Actually I think is a silver Carerra (may be mistaken as I don't work in the processor group)
I seriously doubt anybody in the processor group had any say in naming conventions.
Go take a look at the parking lot by the marketing folks and get back to us on this.
Even Microsoft's own homepage works fine in Firefox and Konqueror.
Although they do have 25 validation errors on their homepage alone.
Chewie: "Gwaaaaaaaaaaaaa!" (Babelfish: "It's not my fault!")
I don't know what babelfish you're using, but it would be more like:
"Not to me is the fault pointing at."
The mantra of most of the media these days is basically "maximum sales, minimum effort". Researching the facts, using statistics correctly - these take effort and don't sell papers/advertising time.
It's even more complicated than that.
Maximizing sales means, in the case of NBC, maximizing profits for GE.
Now if they can help sell a war then they can help sell billions in weapons which is more than they make in advertizing. So they, in fact, did just that. It's similar just with different playeres for all of the other networks.
Researching facts isn't even an issue. They can know full well that the "facts" aren't facts yet they will report the lies anyway. They, in fact, have a legal responsibility to do so if it will help mazimize shareholder value.
The sad thing about the freedom of the press that these vultures hide behind is that they are free to do just that.
This is one of the main reasons I get all my news from the Daily Show with Jon Stewart. At least then I know it's all fake. :)
The really sad thing is that this show is the only major "news" program in the country that actually does call bullshit on the most obvious lies told by public figures.
Now, is that lying? Probably not, but it's dishonest.
Absolutely 100% yes it is a lie.
Saying "There is some evidence that such and such is true" could well be a true statement.
Saying "Such and such is absolutely true and can and will kill you within 45 minutes" when you know full well that you don't know it is true is absolutely a lie.
The fact that it was done with the explicit intention of misleading people in the interests of murdering 10s of thousands of people makes it far far worse than a simple and well-intentioned lie like: Santa Claus brings you those presents.
"I want to know why Bill Gates thinks it can't be built in."
A recent court case comes to mind...
The recent court case that said they're guilty, but more than welcome to continue exactly as they had been?
Where was the incentive for them to stop in the court case?????
Wouldn't a male cow be a hermaphrodite?
A note to all dairy farmers:
Please be very careful milking your hermaphroditic cows.
Thanks you.
I dont know about you, but flailing people in pink suits wouldnt have made me kill someone.
;-)
Well, unless you can die from clawing your own eyes out
No, you just have to agree to give up your card if you ever move out of Ontario. Which makes sense, cause it's an Ontario card.
How does this work?
I thought health care was nationalized in Canada, not "Provincized".
IANAC, and I fail to see any valid points.
The valid point is that this whole argument is about restricting access to certain materials because *some* people feel that the content is not appropriate due to violence and/or sex.
The Bible contains these same things and to some extent much more of them and much more extreme.
Hence the same exact argument they are using to restrict access to video games, if valid, would demonstrate that the bible should be restricted as well.
Now, either you agree that access to the bible should be restricted, or there is something wrong with the argument in favor of restricting access to video games.
QED.
Isn't this a tool for the parents to use?
No, it is not a tool for the parent to use.
It is a restriction forced on everybody because some whiny little bitches are stupid enough to have kids that they are not willing to raise properly.
If you have a kid who you consider too young to play a videogame, and they manage to get it installed on your computer, then you are an incompetent parent. That is a tool for a parent to use: Being aware of what the fuck your kids are doing.
Most people are adults. By trying to drag all of society down to a child's level, you are saying that you are incompetent to raise your own kids and you are placing the burden on the rest of us.
When you do this, don't be surprised when more and more of your rights and responsibilities as a parent are taken away.
Maybe society should force your kid to follow some particular religion (which one doesn't matter for this example as long as it's different than yours)? Why not? It's a good and moral one I assure you.
You can't be with your kid at all times to protect them from the dangers of all the "wrong" ones out there.
Dude. It was widely reported and admitted that the CIA did not agree with the threat assessment.
Are you seriously trying to claim that never happened?
Insane.
've never seen such hatemongering and political venom in my entire life as I've seen from the left wingers these past few years.
Let's see.
The right has been increasingly attacking anybody who disagrees with them as traitors, criminals and terrorist sympathisers. They own talk radio and all of the major media, so there is no hint of a centrist viewpoint to be heard on the news.
They are committing treason on a massive scale (stolen elections, wars started on completely made up pretenses, attempting for the first time in history to pass an amendment to create greater discrimination and restrict freedom, passing the Patriot act which outlaws patriotism and just for the hell of it prevents parents for suing a company if their fucking products give their children autism)
The simple fact is that hating the right wing slime is the only possible position of a patriot.
They are cowards and they are traitors.
Try and refute that simple fact without your lies, and with some actual facts at your disposal you ignorant fuckhole.
and a right-wing christian,
BZZZTTT.
Wrong.
There is no such thing.
Right wing philosophy is completely inconsistent with Christian philosophy.
It would also be nice if this safety tag was unobtrusive. I had a written job offer rescinded because the employer found out that I was going to get a transplant, so now I go out of my way to "hide" my condition from potential employers.
But is there any reason to believe that this information will not be given to potential employers?
Keep in mind that everything like this is done by business for the benefit of business.
You will find it *much* harder to keep your condition to yourself when this kind of thing goes live.
Remember, security only has to fail once.
So all of 98 Senators who voted for the PATROIT act are actually Republicans?
Nope, but they are all traitors.