Your TVs are not bricked, you either don't know what bricked means or you don't know what the switch over is.
And I don't know how you could possibly think your VCR and DVR are at all affected by this, unless you're still taping shows to VHS, which would be silly if you have a DVR, or if you've got DVR you've more than likely got cable in which case this has no affect on you, or you spend $60 and your so called "$3000 of bricked hardware" works just as it did before. You know, because it's not actually bricked, it's just not getting OTA broadcasts.
In fact the more I think about it the less I can figure out what you actually think the problem is.
Last time I checked all your shit still works perfectly, including the part that receives analog TV signals, there are just no signals to be received. You're mad because the government is turning off a service that is provided to you essentially for free, and you want them to pay you so that you can enjoy a different free service?
To fix your analogy, this is like companies loaning you a bumper covered in ads, and now the government is telling them they have to stop offering the old shitty bumpers and offer a different design and you're pissed about buying new mounting brackets for your damn free bumpers claiming that your $3000 car is now useless because of the lack of free bumpers on the market!
The only problem I had with the community service is the projected implementation. Obviously they can't make it completely volunteer because that would screw full time workers/students trying to pay their way through school, so they offer a tax break. Unfortunately most full time students don't have $4500 in taxes to get a break from, I do however, so it seems like there would be more benefit to someone like me to take a class at some community college and do my service at $40 an hour worth of tax break instead of being one of the people who it's intended to affect. A few minor changes and it's all good.
The problem with allowing the traces to anyone who asks, as the argument goes, is that a lot of these traces are parts or ongoing investigations or run by undercover officers or on information gained from them, and allowing the cat out of the bag would jeopardize their ability to do their jobs as well as potentially their safety. One of the main people pushing for the repeal is the mayor of Chicago, but his reasoning is to use the data as evidence in lawsuits against gun manufacturers, which hardly seems to outweigh the downside.
I just found out about purchasing NFA devices as the trustee of a corporation a couple weeks ago. Crazy stuff for people who know how to fill out paperwork.
He's a big government Democrat in the style of Roosevelt, he's never said or acted any differently, the only debate is whether you consider the action correct or not. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. I'm a big fan of public works programs, I think a large number of unemployed workers and a large number of needed infrastructure projects is too good a solution to ignore. I don't agree with simply throwing money at problems, which is exactly his strategy with two supported bailouts so far, a tax cut stimulus package on the way and cries for government health care. I didn't realize that his desire to expand the government was ever in question, the man has a plan up for government mandated community service on his website, what do you want me to say?
As far as rights are concerned, the big one is 2nd Amendment rights, and this is all once again clearly listed on whitehouse.gov. He supports the repealing of the Tiahrt Amendment on the grounds that it "gives law enforcement the tools they need" ignoring the fact that it in no way applies to law enforcement and that it's repeal is opposed by both the BATFE and the FOP. He and Biden also want to enact the AWB permanently, and regardless of how someone feel about gun ownership, interpretation of the constitution, or any of the more debatable topics, the AWB is a poorly written and misguided set of rules that bear no basis in reality. No one with the slightest understanding of firearms could have conceived a set of rules that make bans on perceived danger and "evilness" while allowing weapons of far greater lethality to remain legal simply because the writers were too ignorant to properly convey their desires.
Rush Limbaugh is a big fat stupid idiot. (and other observations)
You are going to ignore the first two paragraphs even though they directly pertain to the shit you are trying to pull? Okay. That doesn't change the fact you are merely being a parrot, which is relevant. It's the real problem and the real issue I take with your post. You quite frankly didn't do your homework and then spout the same uninformed slogans every news outlet is. That is a BIG problem and that kind of attitude is precisely what's been getting our country into the shitter. People voted for McCain because they believed Obama was a terrorist. They wouldn't do research and just parroted these silly headlines to each other to reinforce the idea. That is ENTIRELY relevant to your post.
No, I voted for Obama, so apparently you didn't do you homework and instead of responding to the things I wrote, you assumed that I was part of an entirely different subset of the population and proceded to base your entire reply on that even though I gave you a nice easy way out by saying I wasn't going to reply because it was irrelevant. Well played.
Do I need to spell out how silly and dangerous that is some more? What happened to being intelligent and having informed opinions? You're free to have beef with whatever you want but you ought to back it with some kind of reasoning beyond a silly "all or nothing" idea that does nothing to hurt the administration if it were held to.
The rule was put in place for a good reason. it was so that lobbyists had a much harder time influencing government as badly as it has for the last.. well, how long now? This "all or nothing" thing you keep mentioning has to go. 100% adherence to anything is a very bad idea because it does not allow any sort of flexibility which we sorely need to change how this country operates for the better. I (and many other people) would rather Obama break the rule to hire in a single person who the President feels is incredibly capable than abandoning the law altogether. Horrible analogy time.
I get what the rule is for, you clearly don't get that it's just as easy to not create a revolving door for lobbyists regardless of whether there's an executive order in place. My issue with the order is not that he made, or that he wants an exception, it's that he made it already knowing that he needed an exception. It begs the questions, "What was the point?" I never used the phrase "all or nothing", and you don't seem to get that my point is that in the real world, where sometimes people used to be lobbyist, and these are people that may be experts in the field maybe Obama shouldn't make an "all or nothing" statement about their hiring that he already knows is unrealistic.
Saying "the administration shouldn't even have a rule in the first place if it's going to make an exception" is like saying Ambulances shouldn't be allowed to speed or go on the wrong side of the road because of the law they must obey, even though the reason is acceptable and necessary to save someone's life. Surely you can see how this is directly relevant. As long as he is up front about exactly why he made the decision and it is a sensible decision, that is acceptable. It's when they go behind the scenes or do it for shitty reasons where the problems start. It was not a blind decision.
No, that's a poor analogy, because traffic laws are a direct necessity for maintaining orderly traffic flow and safety. The executive order directly accomplished nothing but a front page headline for CNN. He could simply say "We're not going to be corrupt and beholden to special interest" and it would have the exact same effect. Or better yet, he could just not be corrupt and beholden to special interests, and it would have even more of an effect. I have no issue with rules, or exceptions to rules, if, and only if, the rules accomplishes something in the first place. No one says he can't make exceptions, but I question the logic and intelligence of a man who creates a rule knowing, at the time of his creation, that he's going to break it.
I'm going to ignore the first two paragraphs, because they don't apply to conversation at all.
The point is, there was 0 accomplished by making the executive order, it was a feel good measure. He didn't need to make an executive order to accomplish a clean government not controlled by special interests, he did it because it looks good in the media and more power to him, people like that sort of thing.
BUT, if you know you want to hire a former lobbyist whose hiring would violate the rule you just made, JUST DON'T ISSUE THE ORDER. It's that simple.
I think it would have been better just to select the best people for jobs and run a clean administration without trying to to ran it down everyone's throats just what an impeccably clean administration you're running.
The executive order is nothing but a marketing ploy, the best way to not have your administration not run by lobbyists is, oddly enough, to not let it be run by lobbyists. Making a grand declaration to the fact is a symbolic gesture, and I think it removes quite a bit of the symbolism when you have to ask for an exception shortly after it.
To their credit, they bought their way into the entertainment console market in only a generation when everyone told them it would be absolute suicide to even try. Next round if they can avoid the whole red ring of death fiasco they've got the market share now to be more than profitable.
I almost didn't elect him because he's a proponent of big government, throwing my money into sink holes and asking why I would even want those silly freedoms I have. In fact the only reason he got elected is because I know how McCain would have been different, and God help us all if that happened.
I happen to live very close to GM's Janesville, WI plant, and right there you're looking at a town ready to basically be wiped off the face of the map by the GM collapse.
Of course, that's what happens when you have overpaid workers with no barriers to entry. Why should anyone take the time to learn useful skills when they can take a union job straight out of highschool? Their execs did them wrong on a grand scale, but I know plenty of people who's lives are in the shitter right now because took the path of absolute least resistance, knowing it was a unrealistic and unsustainable gamble, and lost.
You know you can look up information like that every year when the main budget is released? There are lots of people who do this kind of work independently. The problem with the bailouts is that they're a giant trough of money being thrown at random with little to no review or oversight.
The big debate I notice every year is whether the VA budget should fall under defense/military or health care and social programs.
The ESRb is, more or less mandatory, though it is a self-imposed system by the industry to head-offlawsuits from greedy parents who want to claim that they didn't know Curb Stomper 4: Skullfucker was violent or they wouldn't have purchased it for the child they don't want to pay any attention to.
80-90% of gamers are not children, nor is the Wii the only console for children.
I've been playing games like Command and Conquer and Doom since I was in elementary school, was my mother excited about it? Probably not, but it kept me entertained and out of trouble and now I have my degree, a good job, and a clean criminal record. As long as parents keep allowing M rated games to raise their children they'll be plenty of titles to keep the young ones busy.
The problem with the comic book industry is not that they moved to "more mature content" and lost the child audience, it's that they flooded the market with so many useless rehashes and spin offs with absolutely no improvement. I would also bet in part because of the growing prevalence of videogames. Why read about Superman when you could BE Superman?
I'm going to have to assume that because our discussion was about abuses by the ATF in registering new automatic weapons so that they can be sold for immense profits to fund political campaigns that he was in fact more worried about that aspect and not the easily obtained $200 BATF tax stamp.
If he wanted a semi-auto he could just build 15-25 AR-15s for what he's spend on that single select fire M-16, which, although very tempting is satisfying in a much different way.
Because that's what the key does, that's the point of it, that's it's assigned functionality in that context.
You said it yourself, in that situation even if autorun is disabled in the registry it still functions, so it's an example completely irrelevant to the GPs question or my response.
I'm honestly baffled that people are arguing with a single sentence I posted that I may as well have pasted directly from the Windows Help. The man wanted to know if there was a hot key equivalent to editing the registry. There is, it's called the shift key. The fact that neither one of them fixes any number of problems has nothing to do with my answer.
2. Yeah, I wouldn't have even thought that was an option, your would think that the BATF would be far better served politically and ethically by waiting for a politician to come and ask for a favor and then dropping the hammer on them. I think all that illustrates is that the NFA, BATF, AWB, etc, are far more about money and control than about safety.
4. Which is silly. Make them Curio and Relic and require the full-auto tax stamp, end of story.
Exactly. You're far worse off being a law abiding citizen trying to work within the system than some gangbanger trying to impress his friends. This is not how laws should work. I mistook your tone for being critical about the availability of full-auto weapons so my comment about getting it illegally was directed at that.
I would go so far as to say that when I google most things if it's a general topic rather than a specific website I'm usually just looking for a link to wikipedia because google is much more forgiving of incorrect spellings.
Slashdot Mirror
Hi, me again.
Your TVs are not bricked, you either don't know what bricked means or you don't know what the switch over is.
And I don't know how you could possibly think your VCR and DVR are at all affected by this, unless you're still taping shows to VHS, which would be silly if you have a DVR, or if you've got DVR you've more than likely got cable in which case this has no affect on you, or you spend $60 and your so called "$3000 of bricked hardware" works just as it did before. You know, because it's not actually bricked, it's just not getting OTA broadcasts.
In fact the more I think about it the less I can figure out what you actually think the problem is.
Last time I checked all your shit still works perfectly, including the part that receives analog TV signals, there are just no signals to be received. You're mad because the government is turning off a service that is provided to you essentially for free, and you want them to pay you so that you can enjoy a different free service?
To fix your analogy, this is like companies loaning you a bumper covered in ads, and now the government is telling them they have to stop offering the old shitty bumpers and offer a different design and you're pissed about buying new mounting brackets for your damn free bumpers claiming that your $3000 car is now useless because of the lack of free bumpers on the market!
Or it makes students skip to play Starcraft...
The only problem I had with the community service is the projected implementation. Obviously they can't make it completely volunteer because that would screw full time workers/students trying to pay their way through school, so they offer a tax break. Unfortunately most full time students don't have $4500 in taxes to get a break from, I do however, so it seems like there would be more benefit to someone like me to take a class at some community college and do my service at $40 an hour worth of tax break instead of being one of the people who it's intended to affect. A few minor changes and it's all good.
The problem with allowing the traces to anyone who asks, as the argument goes, is that a lot of these traces are parts or ongoing investigations or run by undercover officers or on information gained from them, and allowing the cat out of the bag would jeopardize their ability to do their jobs as well as potentially their safety. One of the main people pushing for the repeal is the mayor of Chicago, but his reasoning is to use the data as evidence in lawsuits against gun manufacturers, which hardly seems to outweigh the downside.
I just found out about purchasing NFA devices as the trustee of a corporation a couple weeks ago. Crazy stuff for people who know how to fill out paperwork.
$200 for a tax stamp is nothing compared to $10,000 (if you're lucky) for a full auto weapon.
He's a big government Democrat in the style of Roosevelt, he's never said or acted any differently, the only debate is whether you consider the action correct or not. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. I'm a big fan of public works programs, I think a large number of unemployed workers and a large number of needed infrastructure projects is too good a solution to ignore. I don't agree with simply throwing money at problems, which is exactly his strategy with two supported bailouts so far, a tax cut stimulus package on the way and cries for government health care. I didn't realize that his desire to expand the government was ever in question, the man has a plan up for government mandated community service on his website, what do you want me to say?
As far as rights are concerned, the big one is 2nd Amendment rights, and this is all once again clearly listed on whitehouse.gov. He supports the repealing of the Tiahrt Amendment on the grounds that it "gives law enforcement the tools they need" ignoring the fact that it in no way applies to law enforcement and that it's repeal is opposed by both the BATFE and the FOP. He and Biden also want to enact the AWB permanently, and regardless of how someone feel about gun ownership, interpretation of the constitution, or any of the more debatable topics, the AWB is a poorly written and misguided set of rules that bear no basis in reality. No one with the slightest understanding of firearms could have conceived a set of rules that make bans on perceived danger and "evilness" while allowing weapons of far greater lethality to remain legal simply because the writers were too ignorant to properly convey their desires.
Rush Limbaugh is a big fat stupid idiot. (and other observations)
You are going to ignore the first two paragraphs even though they directly pertain to the shit you are trying to pull? Okay. That doesn't change the fact you are merely being a parrot, which is relevant. It's the real problem and the real issue I take with your post. You quite frankly didn't do your homework and then spout the same uninformed slogans every news outlet is. That is a BIG problem and that kind of attitude is precisely what's been getting our country into the shitter. People voted for McCain because they believed Obama was a terrorist. They wouldn't do research and just parroted these silly headlines to each other to reinforce the idea. That is ENTIRELY relevant to your post.
No, I voted for Obama, so apparently you didn't do you homework and instead of responding to the things I wrote, you assumed that I was part of an entirely different subset of the population and proceded to base your entire reply on that even though I gave you a nice easy way out by saying I wasn't going to reply because it was irrelevant. Well played.
Do I need to spell out how silly and dangerous that is some more? What happened to being intelligent and having informed opinions? You're free to have beef with whatever you want but you ought to back it with some kind of reasoning beyond a silly "all or nothing" idea that does nothing to hurt the administration if it were held to.
The rule was put in place for a good reason. it was so that lobbyists had a much harder time influencing government as badly as it has for the last.. well, how long now? This "all or nothing" thing you keep mentioning has to go. 100% adherence to anything is a very bad idea because it does not allow any sort of flexibility which we sorely need to change how this country operates for the better. I (and many other people) would rather Obama break the rule to hire in a single person who the President feels is incredibly capable than abandoning the law altogether. Horrible analogy time.
I get what the rule is for, you clearly don't get that it's just as easy to not create a revolving door for lobbyists regardless of whether there's an executive order in place. My issue with the order is not that he made, or that he wants an exception, it's that he made it already knowing that he needed an exception. It begs the questions, "What was the point?" I never used the phrase "all or nothing", and you don't seem to get that my point is that in the real world, where sometimes people used to be lobbyist, and these are people that may be experts in the field maybe Obama shouldn't make an "all or nothing" statement about their hiring that he already knows is unrealistic.
Saying "the administration shouldn't even have a rule in the first place if it's going to make an exception" is like saying Ambulances shouldn't be allowed to speed or go on the wrong side of the road because of the law they must obey, even though the reason is acceptable and necessary to save someone's life. Surely you can see how this is directly relevant. As long as he is up front about exactly why he made the decision and it is a sensible decision, that is acceptable. It's when they go behind the scenes or do it for shitty reasons where the problems start. It was not a blind decision.
No, that's a poor analogy, because traffic laws are a direct necessity for maintaining orderly traffic flow and safety. The executive order directly accomplished nothing but a front page headline for CNN. He could simply say "We're not going to be corrupt and beholden to special interest" and it would have the exact same effect. Or better yet, he could just not be corrupt and beholden to special interests, and it would have even more of an effect. I have no issue with rules, or exceptions to rules, if, and only if, the rules accomplishes something in the first place. No one says he can't make exceptions, but I question the logic and intelligence of a man who creates a rule knowing, at the time of his creation, that he's going to break it.
Funny, I didn't vote for him, and I must have missed the part where the existence of Bush changes my opinions on Obama's policy.
I'm going to ignore the first two paragraphs, because they don't apply to conversation at all.
The point is, there was 0 accomplished by making the executive order, it was a feel good measure. He didn't need to make an executive order to accomplish a clean government not controlled by special interests, he did it because it looks good in the media and more power to him, people like that sort of thing.
BUT, if you know you want to hire a former lobbyist whose hiring would violate the rule you just made, JUST DON'T ISSUE THE ORDER. It's that simple.
I think it would have been better just to select the best people for jobs and run a clean administration without trying to to ran it down everyone's throats just what an impeccably clean administration you're running.
The executive order is nothing but a marketing ploy, the best way to not have your administration not run by lobbyists is, oddly enough, to not let it be run by lobbyists. Making a grand declaration to the fact is a symbolic gesture, and I think it removes quite a bit of the symbolism when you have to ask for an exception shortly after it.
To their credit, they bought their way into the entertainment console market in only a generation when everyone told them it would be absolute suicide to even try. Next round if they can avoid the whole red ring of death fiasco they've got the market share now to be more than profitable.
What software? The Zune software? How is that any worse than installing iTunes?
I almost didn't elect him because he's a proponent of big government, throwing my money into sink holes and asking why I would even want those silly freedoms I have. In fact the only reason he got elected is because I know how McCain would have been different, and God help us all if that happened.
What if we're upset about both of them?
I happen to live very close to GM's Janesville, WI plant, and right there you're looking at a town ready to basically be wiped off the face of the map by the GM collapse.
Of course, that's what happens when you have overpaid workers with no barriers to entry. Why should anyone take the time to learn useful skills when they can take a union job straight out of highschool? Their execs did them wrong on a grand scale, but I know plenty of people who's lives are in the shitter right now because took the path of absolute least resistance, knowing it was a unrealistic and unsustainable gamble, and lost.
You know you can look up information like that every year when the main budget is released? There are lots of people who do this kind of work independently. The problem with the bailouts is that they're a giant trough of money being thrown at random with little to no review or oversight.
The big debate I notice every year is whether the VA budget should fall under defense/military or health care and social programs.
Like issuing that executive order on lobbyists to much fan fair and then quietly asking for an exception the next day?
I like this one though, hopefully it'll be as good in practice as it is in theory.
The ESRb is, more or less mandatory, though it is a self-imposed system by the industry to head-offlawsuits from greedy parents who want to claim that they didn't know Curb Stomper 4: Skullfucker was violent or they wouldn't have purchased it for the child they don't want to pay any attention to.
80-90% of gamers are not children, nor is the Wii the only console for children.
I've been playing games like Command and Conquer and Doom since I was in elementary school, was my mother excited about it? Probably not, but it kept me entertained and out of trouble and now I have my degree, a good job, and a clean criminal record. As long as parents keep allowing M rated games to raise their children they'll be plenty of titles to keep the young ones busy.
The problem with the comic book industry is not that they moved to "more mature content" and lost the child audience, it's that they flooded the market with so many useless rehashes and spin offs with absolutely no improvement. I would also bet in part because of the growing prevalence of videogames. Why read about Superman when you could BE Superman?
"I'm sorry the Coen Brothers don't direct the child porn I watch, they're hard to get a hold of."
I'm going to have to assume that because our discussion was about abuses by the ATF in registering new automatic weapons so that they can be sold for immense profits to fund political campaigns that he was in fact more worried about that aspect and not the easily obtained $200 BATF tax stamp.
If he wanted a semi-auto he could just build 15-25 AR-15s for what he's spend on that single select fire M-16, which, although very tempting is satisfying in a much different way.
Because that's what the key does, that's the point of it, that's it's assigned functionality in that context.
You said it yourself, in that situation even if autorun is disabled in the registry it still functions, so it's an example completely irrelevant to the GPs question or my response.
I'm honestly baffled that people are arguing with a single sentence I posted that I may as well have pasted directly from the Windows Help. The man wanted to know if there was a hot key equivalent to editing the registry. There is, it's called the shift key. The fact that neither one of them fixes any number of problems has nothing to do with my answer.
2. Yeah, I wouldn't have even thought that was an option, your would think that the BATF would be far better served politically and ethically by waiting for a politician to come and ask for a favor and then dropping the hammer on them. I think all that illustrates is that the NFA, BATF, AWB, etc, are far more about money and control than about safety.
4. Which is silly. Make them Curio and Relic and require the full-auto tax stamp, end of story.
Exactly. You're far worse off being a law abiding citizen trying to work within the system than some gangbanger trying to impress his friends. This is not how laws should work. I mistook your tone for being critical about the availability of full-auto weapons so my comment about getting it illegally was directed at that.
I would go so far as to say that when I google most things if it's a general topic rather than a specific website I'm usually just looking for a link to wikipedia because google is much more forgiving of incorrect spellings.