$450/month is not incredibly unusual... when I first got my drivers license I was living in southern NJ (what could be called the NJ "countryside"), I took drivers ed courses, had no record (no negatives anyway), white/male driving an eight year old minivan -- they were charging me roughly $280/month. absolutely ridiculous.
after moving to a large city in Ohio prior to my 25th birthday, that dropped to about $70/month for the same car with the same record.
Small suppliers simply couldn't afford to lay the cable, and you would never have very many suppliers because that would dilute the market and even big players wouldn't be able to recover the cable costs.
Which is where the local government could step in, take out a loan, and run the cable to get a connection, then lease use to private companies equally. Free markets are a good idea -- but you do not have to go 100% free market and 0% government, you can find a happy medium. The problem is that right now we are like 10% free market and 90% government, with the big corporations running the government. I could go on about that, but that would be (-1) off topic.
the distinction of being on "the other side of the country" doesn't mean a whole lot with the internet.
My point is that the results of any computer evaluation must be looked at critically and intelligently. It would be an abuse of the system to blindly accept results and punish students.
It's a natural part of the system that some material or ideas will appear to be plagiarized -- it's up to the instructor based on the content, structure, and syntax of the paper to determine if it was indeed copied or just an unfortunate choice of words by the student.
...assuming that every document ever written was online and indexed by Google. Kinda seems like shooting in the dark. maybe you hit something, maybe you don't -- missing doesn't mean there's not something there and only provides a false sense of security.
True -- I had the same thought myself in fact. Eventually the database will reach a threshold where the majority of ways of describing something will be "used" already.
I do not agree, however, that teachers will blindly accept the results of the computer. Some may, and I hope that parents and administrators raise hell when they do. Most teachers and users of the system should be intelligent enough to know that student A in their class did not copy three lines verbose from a paper written ten years before on the other side of the country.
I do not necessarily agree with the use of this system and the potential for abuse, but I do believe the idea is sound if applied appropriately.
There are very few, if any, original ideas in the scheme of things. AFAIK the point of writing most "papers" in high school/college is to describe an idea or support a thesis -- either way, you are probably not the first person (or the only person) who thinks X.
If you are not plagiarizing then you should be the only one who supports or describes the idea the way you do.
I have heard this many times, and I think it is backwards. The precise reason that there is a problem is that the voters are educated. They do not think for themselves but instead believe what they are told to believe by their intellectual masters: Big media.
I'm not going to argue semantics with you -- I agree with what you are saying and I think we are both saying the same thing. If enough voters were more aware of the truth, we would be better off.
Our Constitution is not perfect, but it is damned good and deserves respect.
I hate to say it, but that's possibly the reason that originally only white male landowners had the right to vote. I'm not saying that we should ever even consider bringing something like that back, just that at the time those people were more likely to be involved in the community and educated (not necessarily academically educated, but real-world educated). These days there are so many ignorant people who will go down to the polls and vote because some multi-million dollar ad told them they HAD to, without knowing a damned thing about any of the real politics, is a shame.
I think that the world we live in today is possibly Franklin's/Jefferson's/etc... worst nightmare. The only way we're going to improve anything, regardless of what side of the aisle we're on, is to somehow educate the voters.
I'm personally involved with the Campaign for Liberty which is trying to do just that -- while I have no illusions about any of you agreeing with my points of view, I hope we can all agree that if we do not educate the voters we're just going to continue getting raped by the people we put into office.
yeah... i'd be willing to bet the NSA spends at least five times that much on digital security, though i would not be surprised if this was a student to get more funding, transfer the funding, or something else along those lines.
How about we just disconnected the government from the internet?
Seriously though -- save $100 million and run a separate network. The idea that if I had the right combination of addresses and credentials I could launch a nuke right now is ludicrus. Is it really necessary to have systems that could compromise our national security connected to the internet? In this day and age? Really?
it has got to be pretty clear by now that no one in Washington has the balls to even utter the word "treason" -- which is effectively what the blatant ignorance of the Supreme Law of the Land amounts to
This anti-republican dogma has really got to stop. First of all, if you are going to believe in the myth of the "two sided democracy", then you have to at least admit that there are both good or bad eggs on both sides of the aisle. If that weren't true, then there would be no way we would be in the constitutional mess we are in today -- as soon as the "right" side got the majority, everything would have been fixed. Since that's obviously not the case, you have to assume that each majority has its' own agenda and the entire contemporary political machinery exists solely to maintain the existing power base in Washington and the elite of the U.S.
Only when we as a society can get beyond the Democrat versus Republican myth will we truly start dismantling the subterfuge that is destroying our liberties, our Constitution, and our democracy. If we start looking at every politician based soley on his or her merits alone and ignore his or her political affiliation we would see the enormous "change of course" that we have been promised oh-so-many times and never actually seen.
hell, i don't care what their slant is, the more people out there looking at and reporting on the economy and the government, the better. perhaps through all of the crap that comes up we might find a grain of truth
I'm familiar with IPv6. It seems you are completely missing the point of my comment... lmao
Perhaps this might help you understand:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Languagehttp://www.dictionary.com
You're suggesting a solution for a lack of unique IP addresses as a solution for a lack of DNS names. It's completely nonsensical.
the whole point is to have a single URL to identify a single person. What possible purpose could having more than one identifier serve? Especially since they're entirely abstract...
Why make up numbers? Every american already has a unique SSN - we can use that. In fact... we should global the system, give everyone an "Earth ID" at birth. I'm sure the credit companies and governments would LOVE that.
Slashdot Mirror
IMO Episode 1 sucking had nothing to do with special effects and everything to do with shitty writing.
This is a law suit waiting to happen if there is no disclosure that the books will have these "flags" at the time of purchase.
Isn't this exactly what humans did to the wraith on stargate atlantis?
We all know how that turned out.
$450/month is not incredibly unusual... when I first got my drivers license I was living in southern NJ (what could be called the NJ "countryside"), I took drivers ed courses, had no record (no negatives anyway), white/male driving an eight year old minivan -- they were charging me roughly $280/month. absolutely ridiculous.
after moving to a large city in Ohio prior to my 25th birthday, that dropped to about $70/month for the same car with the same record.
no offense, but who are you, Steve Ballmer?
How about something to back up your claim?
Small suppliers simply couldn't afford to lay the cable, and you would never have very many suppliers because that would dilute the market and even big players wouldn't be able to recover the cable costs.
Which is where the local government could step in, take out a loan, and run the cable to get a connection, then lease use to private companies equally. Free markets are a good idea -- but you do not have to go 100% free market and 0% government, you can find a happy medium. The problem is that right now we are like 10% free market and 90% government, with the big corporations running the government. I could go on about that, but that would be (-1) off topic.
NJ-PA-DE
the distinction of being on "the other side of the country" doesn't mean a whole lot with the internet.
My point is that the results of any computer evaluation must be looked at critically and intelligently. It would be an abuse of the system to blindly accept results and punish students.
It's a natural part of the system that some material or ideas will appear to be plagiarized -- it's up to the instructor based on the content, structure, and syntax of the paper to determine if it was indeed copied or just an unfortunate choice of words by the student.
...assuming that every document ever written was online and indexed by Google. Kinda seems like shooting in the dark. maybe you hit something, maybe you don't -- missing doesn't mean there's not something there and only provides a false sense of security.
True -- I had the same thought myself in fact. Eventually the database will reach a threshold where the majority of ways of describing something will be "used" already.
I do not agree, however, that teachers will blindly accept the results of the computer. Some may, and I hope that parents and administrators raise hell when they do. Most teachers and users of the system should be intelligent enough to know that student A in their class did not copy three lines verbose from a paper written ten years before on the other side of the country.
I do not necessarily agree with the use of this system and the potential for abuse, but I do believe the idea is sound if applied appropriately.
There are very few, if any, original ideas in the scheme of things. AFAIK the point of writing most "papers" in high school/college is to describe an idea or support a thesis -- either way, you are probably not the first person (or the only person) who thinks X.
If you are not plagiarizing then you should be the only one who supports or describes the idea the way you do.
I have heard this many times, and I think it is backwards. The precise reason that there is a problem is that the voters are educated. They do not think for themselves but instead believe what they are told to believe by their intellectual masters: Big media.
I'm not going to argue semantics with you -- I agree with what you are saying and I think we are both saying the same thing. If enough voters were more aware of the truth, we would be better off.
Our Constitution is not perfect, but it is damned good and deserves respect.
I hate to say it, but that's possibly the reason that originally only white male landowners had the right to vote. I'm not saying that we should ever even consider bringing something like that back, just that at the time those people were more likely to be involved in the community and educated (not necessarily academically educated, but real-world educated). These days there are so many ignorant people who will go down to the polls and vote because some multi-million dollar ad told them they HAD to, without knowing a damned thing about any of the real politics, is a shame.
I think that the world we live in today is possibly Franklin's/Jefferson's/etc... worst nightmare. The only way we're going to improve anything, regardless of what side of the aisle we're on, is to somehow educate the voters.
I'm personally involved with the Campaign for Liberty which is trying to do just that -- while I have no illusions about any of you agreeing with my points of view, I hope we can all agree that if we do not educate the voters we're just going to continue getting raped by the people we put into office.
never heard any of those, though i have heard all of the gates claims
I think i'm going to invent a pair of scissors and extend the patent to cover anything you cut with them.
Except when you know how to handle your background apps properly...
I'm pretty sure the limitations placed on the iPhone OS were to preserve battery power more than anything else.
The OS as a whole runs "background apps" perfectly fine.
yeah... i'd be willing to bet the NSA spends at least five times that much on digital security, though i would not be surprised if this was a student to get more funding, transfer the funding, or something else along those lines.
How about we just disconnected the government from the internet?
Seriously though -- save $100 million and run a separate network. The idea that if I had the right combination of addresses and credentials I could launch a nuke right now is ludicrus. Is it really necessary to have systems that could compromise our national security connected to the internet? In this day and age? Really?
it has got to be pretty clear by now that no one in Washington has the balls to even utter the word "treason" -- which is effectively what the blatant ignorance of the Supreme Law of the Land amounts to
This anti-republican dogma has really got to stop. First of all, if you are going to believe in the myth of the "two sided democracy", then you have to at least admit that there are both good or bad eggs on both sides of the aisle. If that weren't true, then there would be no way we would be in the constitutional mess we are in today -- as soon as the "right" side got the majority, everything would have been fixed. Since that's obviously not the case, you have to assume that each majority has its' own agenda and the entire contemporary political machinery exists solely to maintain the existing power base in Washington and the elite of the U.S. Only when we as a society can get beyond the Democrat versus Republican myth will we truly start dismantling the subterfuge that is destroying our liberties, our Constitution, and our democracy. If we start looking at every politician based soley on his or her merits alone and ignore his or her political affiliation we would see the enormous "change of course" that we have been promised oh-so-many times and never actually seen.
hell, i don't care what their slant is, the more people out there looking at and reporting on the economy and the government, the better. perhaps through all of the crap that comes up we might find a grain of truth
:) No, of course I wasn't referring to your spelling. This has been fun.
I'm familiar with IPv6. It seems you are completely missing the point of my comment... lmao Perhaps this might help you understand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Language http://www.dictionary.com You're suggesting a solution for a lack of unique IP addresses as a solution for a lack of DNS names. It's completely nonsensical.
the whole point is to have a single URL to identify a single person. What possible purpose could having more than one identifier serve? Especially since they're entirely abstract...
Why make up numbers? Every american already has a unique SSN - we can use that. In fact... we should global the system, give everyone an "Earth ID" at birth. I'm sure the credit companies and governments would LOVE that.