Of course I had to look it up, seeing as the '70s was a long time ago. According to Wikipedia (and no, I'm not going to provide the hyperlink because I'm a bit drunk and lazy and you can damn well look it up youself (and no, I don't think Wikipedia is the be all to end all)), we are both wrong:
This land is my land, it isn't your land
I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one
If you don't get off, I'll blow your head off
Another version is
This land is my land, this land ain't your land
I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one
I'll blow your head off, if you don't get off
This land is private property
Saying that, I'm sure there are many variations out there, but I still like mine the best....
Damn my druken stupor, it took my about 20 previews to get thi right.
This land is my land,
This land aint your land,
I've got a shot gun,
and you don't got one,
If you don't get off,
I'll blow your head off,
This land belongs to me, not you!
There is no such thing as a "good" healthcare system as measured by those internal and external. I'm living in Germany right now, which has a two-tiered system and from what I see, it's not very good either. The problem with that is it actually punishes the lower middle class.
Now I can't say I'm 100% correct as my German sucks and I haven't read that much about it so my experience is mostly anecdotal. Anyways, take two people, one who makes 40k a year and one who makes 45k/year (all numbers are guesses, I don't know what the change actually is, it might less). The first person, who is forced to be on the public health system actually pays more than the second person because the government wants to make the health care system pay for itself. What this means is that the people who earn the most out of those who are in the public system pay for those who don't earn as much.
As well, my girlfriend had to see a specialist and was told there was a long waiting list to get in to see this person (even though she's a physician herself (and on the cusp of the tiers financially wise, that's how I know anything about this)), but when she just happened to mention she has private insurance they took her the next day. A similar thing happened to a student of mine, he's private so got in much quicker than he normally would have.
In other words, the only ones who benefit from a two-tiered system are those who make a lot of money, the rest of the middle class suffer from it. In the end, though, it is basically impossible for the layman to "decide" which is a better system, as there are so many variables that would take a lot of study to decide. For instance, does the system provide for dental? How about prescription drugs? What are the obligations of the insurer once the client ages?
As for me, the two-tiered system will suck in the future. Right now I'm on a "foreigners" private health care, and it only costs me about $120 US/month, but if I'm here longer than 5 years I'll have to go onto a regular private health plan, and since I haven't been on it since I was in my 20's or early 30's I'll have to pay a lot more. I'm won't be eligible for the government system, even if I get permanent residency, because I'm self-employed, so either I come up with a way to make more money or I give up a job I really enjoy.
The US gets our vast natural resources (especially oil) and better hockey.
For this the US have to give up their "Right to Bear Arms" and their guns their have and take the Canadian Medical System.
Actually, the story is accurate if read carefully, but the headline isn't (not that we haven't seen thatbefore). This ISN'T a paper produced by the UN, but are rather (from the PDF) "An initiative of the Austrian Government for the second phase of the UN World Summit on the Information Society 2003/2005" back in June and presented to the UN Conference in Tunis.
You can also set up folders on your Personal Toolbar and drop any sites you want opened in it. Then, once Firefox starts, middle-click on it and all the bookmarks in it will open in tabs (same as opening the folder and clicking on that option at the bottom), that way it saves having to close all the tabs if you want to open up another Firefox window. I have 4 folders on my Personal Toolbar as a few more RSS feeds, works great for me.
What some of the readers failed to notice here is that this isn't a regular news story and looks to be more of a column called "WEBLOG WATCH" which is "The Magazine's review of blogs". Now considering that freedom of speech is THE issue, and not just on Slashdot, when it comes to weblogs as a whole, I would think that everyone would be jumping up and down supporting the BBC in this.
I would think that Freedom of Speech would be vehemently supported with this mostly American crowd.
I'm sorry to do this to you, but you must be young and new (not here, but to the world in general). It isn't "Episode 4", that is Lucas doublespeak, it is "Star Wars". It isn't "Episode 6" it is "Return of the Jedi". It's OK, though, I realise you must have grown up at a time when the revisionist propoganda must have been in place, but for those of us old enough to remember 1977 and the hype/wonder of the original, it just won't do.
I'm fairly new to Linux, too, and I don't know what I would have done without the internet at my disposal. I don't think that books are really the be-all to end-all to Linux installation. SuSE, Fedora and Ubuntu are all simple for different reasons (right now my distribution of choice is SuSE because I'm trying to get iFolder working) and for most stuff you won't need a manual, but if you do run into a problem, manuals will give you the general overview of how to do things, which is invaluable, especially with things you can do from the command line, but they won't give you much insight for your specific problem (whatever it may be).
But the problem with online help is the people who write them often forget to add a command that might be obvious to a more experienced user or make a typo, both of which can cause hours of frusteration (trust me: either they are I missed a "make install-hotplug" recently and it cost me a day.
Of course the above advice could be wrong/useless because you could be starting from a point much more advanced than me and/or I could just be too stupid for Linux.
But the modern distros are really worth the effort if 1. You enjoy a bit of a challenge, 2. You want to learn about the amazing things the OSS community is putting out and 3. You want to really learn about the power of the computer without spending 1000's on software.
Oh, and remember to make notes when you learn a new command or solve a problem, they will come in invaluable when you decide to check out another distrubtion and run into the same problems again.
There is just a couple of points I'd like to make to this discussion:
1. Those who say the books are just for kids have no idea. Whereas most of the readers are kids of varying ages, I would think at least 40% of the readers are adults. Think of all the people you know who have read the books, or seen the movies - there are a lot of them, aren't there?
2. Lets turn this around and think of it another way - for those of you old enough, would it have changed the shock and surprise for you if you had heard about "No Luke, I am your father" before you saw the movie? Or, more recently, were pissed off that the beeb decided to let you know the Daleks were involved with Bad Wolf before the episode came out and how much better it would have been if it would have come as a surprise.
Suspense and surprise are why most of us read books, that's why murder mysteries (from which much of Harry Potter is derived) are so popular. Do we really want Peroit to say "They all did it" before the end of the movie - of course not. With the explosion of the internet, keeping these juicy little details are harder and harder and I for one applaud Rowling and her publishers for doing everything they can so I don't find out that _____ dies before I have a chance to find out for myself.
I don't understand why people are so offended that they are trying to keep the plot under wraps, it's not a freedom of speech issue or a suppression of rights, in the end its only a book, but, as has been so ably argued above, that has transcended the realms of normal book publishing.
I would have modded this up, except you forgot the best line of the article - "Children are obsessed with the Harry Potter books that they have left television and video games to read these witchcraft manuals."
Imagine that, kids are giving up tv and video games to read, and he thinks this is a terrible thing.
And in English, "I'm not going to eat something" sounds very strange, too. Try "I'm not going to eat anything." "Anything" is generally used for negative sentences and questions, while "something is used for positive sentences.
First, the ruling could be more akin to "inciting a crime" reasoning. By promoting the stealing of copyright material the makers of P2P can be seen as inciting others to commit a crime.
Second, whereas the purpose behind Bittorrent isn't to incite a crime, as mentioned above, the fact that the search engine now up at Bittorrent http//www.bittorrent.com/ could be seen as helping people commit a crime - if you get a hardline judge, it's all it could take.
Of all the posts I've read on this, I would say this is the most insightful. After OSXi comes out, many more people will consider buying a Mac instead of a Windows machine for the simple fact is they already own a licensed copy of XP and they've really heard great things about Macs.
Through acquired (not bought) computers I have 3 XP licenses kicking around (I only use one, though), so there is no need for me to buy another one. I won't be upgrading to Longhorn, so really, why not buy a Mac when I'm ready for a new computer. I know all my Windows software will run on it, plus I can have all the goodies of both operating systems while still only having one computer (ok, I have 4 right now, but that's besides the point).
When buying a new system for most people, the difference in price will not be a huge consideration when you can think you can have both operating systems on one box. I think it'll be huge for Apple.
Sigh, I'm getting tired of Canadians saying how much corruption there is in Canada. There is a huge difference between public perception of corruption http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/spclm/0204 22eng.pdf and more legitimate methods of measuring corruption http://www.transparency.org/cpi/2004/cpi2004_faq.e n.html
Canada isn't ranked that bad in this second index - #12 (for reference, USA is #17 and the UK is #11) and this is after the Sponsorship scandal broke.
Not having read all of the above comments, but having read many of them, I felt I must add my own point of view to the discussion.
First off, I take offence to those who see Canada as a country that is full of corruption. I teach English here in Berlin and try and bring discussion topics to class which can cause some kind of discussion (ok, for my more advanced students who already speak quite good English) and I brought this topic up in class a few weeks ago the week that Chrétien gave his testimony. The general consensus was that this scandal isn't really that huge. As usual, I searched for a web page which ranked countries by corruption, and I found this http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html At the end of 2004, long after Sheila Fraser released her report and the inquiry started (it's actually mentioned in their "Country Report" somewhere) and lo-and-behold, Canada is ranked 12th, above such notables as Germany, France and the USA. In reality, perception hasn't really changed that much in Canada about what went on, but we just want the details.
Which comes to my next point: details. What the Gomery Inquiry will get is a lot of testimony from a lot of different people. As has been noted above, once a person is called to testify, they can't refuse, and they can't "take the 5th" as we have no such thing. There is no such thing as someone getting up in front of the stand and saying that they won't testify, it simply isn't allowed. In other words, we end up getting information from everyone (although sometimes it's useless) and a better picture of the truth comes out.
But there is a trade-off. In Canada, we believe the rights of the individual is more important that the rights of the whole in many ways (in other ways not), and one of those ways is the right to a fair trial. The concept is that when you have a jury, you want to have the best people on the jury, so they will have the intelligence to make a good decision based on the facts. The problem is, those people are usually also the best informed outside of courthouse, which means reading newspapers, watching the news, etc.
Now, I've seen arguments on here that suggest that an intelligent person won't be swayed by the news in the end, but we've seen in history, especially in the 20th C. and more recently in the 21st C. that well educated countries are completely sucked in by socialization and slanted news coverage. Owe, and if you think the media doesn't slant things these days, here is a little article posted last year about Fox News http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,123 9094,00.html The most telling sentence from it is "Fox News could justifiably claim to have achieved a level of accuracy and impartiality that was appropriate to its audience in the US, where different rules apply."
Next, to those who think there will be a snap election called because of this don't really understand Canadian politics at the moment. Those who have saying that there might be a snap election are those who have the most to gain by creating a bit more FUD in Canada's political system - the opposition. There is no way, the the governing party would try and call an election right now. Any party worthy of being in Parliament (and I even include the NDP in this) would hammer them so hard and so fast on trying to cover up the testimony that the current leader wouldn't have a chance.
Talking about the current leader, although he was a member of cabinet during the years in question, there has been no linkage between him and the scandal. As far as I've read, there has been attempts, but not one witness so far has come out and said he was involved. He was the that set up the commission in the fist place and has to live with its results (most previous PM's might not have done that - for those who don't know, he had a majority government at the time and could ha
I've actually heard ONE person say 'aboot'. She was from Ontario (I can't remember where) but we were in Victoria at the time. I pointed at her and started laughing very hard. I think she was a bit offended. I had lived in Canada for about 34 years at the time (i.e. my entire life).
Slashdot Mirror
"this", that is.
This land is my land, it isn't your land
I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one
If you don't get off, I'll blow your head off
Another version is
This land is my land, this land ain't your land
I got a shotgun, and you ain't got one
I'll blow your head off, if you don't get off
This land is private property
Saying that, I'm sure there are many variations out there, but I still like mine the best....
Damn my druken stupor, it took my about 20 previews to get thi right.
This land is my land,
This land aint your land,
I've got a shot gun,
and you don't got one,
If you don't get off,
I'll blow your head off,
This land belongs to me, not you!
But I'll agree with the lawyers thing.
Now I can't say I'm 100% correct as my German sucks and I haven't read that much about it so my experience is mostly anecdotal. Anyways, take two people, one who makes 40k a year and one who makes 45k/year (all numbers are guesses, I don't know what the change actually is, it might less). The first person, who is forced to be on the public health system actually pays more than the second person because the government wants to make the health care system pay for itself. What this means is that the people who earn the most out of those who are in the public system pay for those who don't earn as much.
As well, my girlfriend had to see a specialist and was told there was a long waiting list to get in to see this person (even though she's a physician herself (and on the cusp of the tiers financially wise, that's how I know anything about this)), but when she just happened to mention she has private insurance they took her the next day. A similar thing happened to a student of mine, he's private so got in much quicker than he normally would have.
In other words, the only ones who benefit from a two-tiered system are those who make a lot of money, the rest of the middle class suffer from it. In the end, though, it is basically impossible for the layman to "decide" which is a better system, as there are so many variables that would take a lot of study to decide. For instance, does the system provide for dental? How about prescription drugs? What are the obligations of the insurer once the client ages?
As for me, the two-tiered system will suck in the future. Right now I'm on a "foreigners" private health care, and it only costs me about $120 US/month, but if I'm here longer than 5 years I'll have to go onto a regular private health plan, and since I haven't been on it since I was in my 20's or early 30's I'll have to pay a lot more. I'm won't be eligible for the government system, even if I get permanent residency, because I'm self-employed, so either I come up with a way to make more money or I give up a job I really enjoy.
The US gets our vast natural resources (especially oil) and better hockey. For this the US have to give up their "Right to Bear Arms" and their guns their have and take the Canadian Medical System.
It seems like a fair deal to me.
Actually, the story is accurate if read carefully, but the headline isn't (not that we haven't seen thatbefore). This ISN'T a paper produced by the UN, but are rather (from the PDF) "An initiative of the Austrian Government for the second phase of the UN World Summit on the Information Society 2003/2005" back in June and presented to the UN Conference in Tunis.
You can also set up folders on your Personal Toolbar and drop any sites you want opened in it. Then, once Firefox starts, middle-click on it and all the bookmarks in it will open in tabs (same as opening the folder and clicking on that option at the bottom), that way it saves having to close all the tabs if you want to open up another Firefox window. I have 4 folders on my Personal Toolbar as a few more RSS feeds, works great for me.
I would think that Freedom of Speech would be vehemently supported with this mostly American crowd.
Sorry again for the troll.
But the problem with online help is the people who write them often forget to add a command that might be obvious to a more experienced user or make a typo, both of which can cause hours of frusteration (trust me: either they are I missed a "make install-hotplug" recently and it cost me a day.
Of course the above advice could be wrong/useless because you could be starting from a point much more advanced than me and/or I could just be too stupid for Linux.
But the modern distros are really worth the effort if 1. You enjoy a bit of a challenge, 2. You want to learn about the amazing things the OSS community is putting out and 3. You want to really learn about the power of the computer without spending 1000's on software.
Oh, and remember to make notes when you learn a new command or solve a problem, they will come in invaluable when you decide to check out another distrubtion and run into the same problems again.
Ah, yes, but a couple of beers, especially American beers (sorry for the assumption), doen't constitute drunk.
Are you sure this would never happen in the US? http://www.gothamist.com/archives/2003/06/19/hot_h arry_potters_dont_make_jk_happy_neither_does_killi ng_a_main_character.php
1. Those who say the books are just for kids have no idea. Whereas most of the readers are kids of varying ages, I would think at least 40% of the readers are adults. Think of all the people you know who have read the books, or seen the movies - there are a lot of them, aren't there?
2. Lets turn this around and think of it another way - for those of you old enough, would it have changed the shock and surprise for you if you had heard about "No Luke, I am your father" before you saw the movie? Or, more recently, were pissed off that the beeb decided to let you know the Daleks were involved with Bad Wolf before the episode came out and how much better it would have been if it would have come as a surprise.
Suspense and surprise are why most of us read books, that's why murder mysteries (from which much of Harry Potter is derived) are so popular. Do we really want Peroit to say "They all did it" before the end of the movie - of course not. With the explosion of the internet, keeping these juicy little details are harder and harder and I for one applaud Rowling and her publishers for doing everything they can so I don't find out that _____ dies before I have a chance to find out for myself.
I don't understand why people are so offended that they are trying to keep the plot under wraps, it's not a freedom of speech issue or a suppression of rights, in the end its only a book, but, as has been so ably argued above, that has transcended the realms of normal book publishing.
Imagine that, kids are giving up tv and video games to read, and he thinks this is a terrible thing.
And in English, "I'm not going to eat something" sounds very strange, too. Try "I'm not going to eat anything." "Anything" is generally used for negative sentences and questions, while "something is used for positive sentences.
First, the ruling could be more akin to "inciting a crime" reasoning. By promoting the stealing of copyright material the makers of P2P can be seen as inciting others to commit a crime.
Second, whereas the purpose behind Bittorrent isn't to incite a crime, as mentioned above, the fact that the search engine now up at Bittorrent http//www.bittorrent.com/ could be seen as helping people commit a crime - if you get a hardline judge, it's all it could take.
Cool number, I guess that would make the US's unemployment rate about 38%.
By that fantastic leap of morality, the Germans should all have been rounded up, put into concentration camps and gassed.
Through acquired (not bought) computers I have 3 XP licenses kicking around (I only use one, though), so there is no need for me to buy another one. I won't be upgrading to Longhorn, so really, why not buy a Mac when I'm ready for a new computer. I know all my Windows software will run on it, plus I can have all the goodies of both operating systems while still only having one computer (ok, I have 4 right now, but that's besides the point). When buying a new system for most people, the difference in price will not be a huge consideration when you can think you can have both operating systems on one box. I think it'll be huge for Apple.
Sigh, I'm getting tired of Canadians saying how much corruption there is in Canada. There is a huge difference between public perception of corruption http://www.legermarketing.com/documents/spclm/0204 22eng.pdf and more legitimate methods of measuring corruption http://www.transparency.org/cpi/2004/cpi2004_faq.e n.html
Canada isn't ranked that bad in this second index - #12 (for reference, USA is #17 and the UK is #11) and this is after the Sponsorship scandal broke.
First off, I take offence to those who see Canada as a country that is full of corruption. I teach English here in Berlin and try and bring discussion topics to class which can cause some kind of discussion (ok, for my more advanced students who already speak quite good English) and I brought this topic up in class a few weeks ago the week that Chrétien gave his testimony. The general consensus was that this scandal isn't really that huge. As usual, I searched for a web page which ranked countries by corruption, and I found this http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html At the end of 2004, long after Sheila Fraser released her report and the inquiry started (it's actually mentioned in their "Country Report" somewhere) and lo-and-behold, Canada is ranked 12th, above such notables as Germany, France and the USA. In reality, perception hasn't really changed that much in Canada about what went on, but we just want the details.
Which comes to my next point: details. What the Gomery Inquiry will get is a lot of testimony from a lot of different people. As has been noted above, once a person is called to testify, they can't refuse, and they can't "take the 5th" as we have no such thing. There is no such thing as someone getting up in front of the stand and saying that they won't testify, it simply isn't allowed. In other words, we end up getting information from everyone (although sometimes it's useless) and a better picture of the truth comes out.
But there is a trade-off. In Canada, we believe the rights of the individual is more important that the rights of the whole in many ways (in other ways not), and one of those ways is the right to a fair trial. The concept is that when you have a jury, you want to have the best people on the jury, so they will have the intelligence to make a good decision based on the facts. The problem is, those people are usually also the best informed outside of courthouse, which means reading newspapers, watching the news, etc.
Now, I've seen arguments on here that suggest that an intelligent person won't be swayed by the news in the end, but we've seen in history, especially in the 20th C. and more recently in the 21st C. that well educated countries are completely sucked in by socialization and slanted news coverage. Owe, and if you think the media doesn't slant things these days, here is a little article posted last year about Fox News http://media.guardian.co.uk/site/story/0,14173,123 9094,00.html The most telling sentence from it is "Fox News could justifiably claim to have achieved a level of accuracy and impartiality that was appropriate to its audience in the US, where different rules apply."
Next, to those who think there will be a snap election called because of this don't really understand Canadian politics at the moment. Those who have saying that there might be a snap election are those who have the most to gain by creating a bit more FUD in Canada's political system - the opposition. There is no way, the the governing party would try and call an election right now. Any party worthy of being in Parliament (and I even include the NDP in this) would hammer them so hard and so fast on trying to cover up the testimony that the current leader wouldn't have a chance.
Talking about the current leader, although he was a member of cabinet during the years in question, there has been no linkage between him and the scandal. As far as I've read, there has been attempts, but not one witness so far has come out and said he was involved. He was the that set up the commission in the fist place and has to live with its results (most previous PM's might not have done that - for those who don't know, he had a majority government at the time and could ha
I've actually heard ONE person say 'aboot'. She was from Ontario (I can't remember where) but we were in Victoria at the time. I pointed at her and started laughing very hard. I think she was a bit offended. I had lived in Canada for about 34 years at the time (i.e. my entire life).