No... I wouldn't assume that any more than I would assume any recessive trait would die out if those it showed in couldn't reproduce. There would still be plenty of carriers.
That particular story was likely targeted at those who see money as something desirable rather than as a tool. Possibly it was actually a true story and that particular guy needed to learn that lesson himself. There's nothing innately evil about having money; there's nothing innately good about it either. Like guys with small schlongs say, it's all in how you use it.
Not everyone else, just the assholes. You just noticed the assholes because the folks who weren't didn't feel the need to make sure you were as big an asshole as them by shoving their beliefs down your throat.
Probably, one of these days. At least if it's like everyone keeps saying and gay people are born that way and it's not a conscious choice. Kind of screams genetic, yeah?
Eh, no. Bible Jesus might have told you socialism was a fine way to live but would never have advocated forcing it on anyone. He was pretty big on trying to show you a better way to live but not at the expense of your free will. Libertarian maybe?
Side note: the eye of a needle is what the barely man-sized gates used for bringing livestock in through fortified walls were called. Difficult but not quite the hyperbole it's been made into. Remember, it's the love of money, not money itself, that's called the root of all evil.
American Jesus is the same Jesus. Every nation has assholes.
While I'm inclined to agree that any remotely commercial website should offer and default to encrypted transfers, it also serves you right if you use a service that doesn't encrypt everything. Using a service that doesn't at least offer you the option of encryption is akin to driving a car that you know has defective brakes (ha, car analogy!). If shit goes badly and you knew better, you've no one to blame but yourself. If you didn't know better, it's your own fault for not educating yourself about such basic things and I shall mock you.
Unless you're a cookie baking grandmother willing to bribe me with baked goods. Principles be damned when there are fresh, warm cookies involved.
Ah, see there, just because something gets called a type of liberty doesn't make it liberty much in the way that mountain oysters are most assuredly not oysters.
Participation in government is not liberty of any sort. It is abdication of easily defined individual liberty in exchange for comfort, security, and someone to blame if things don't go your way. That is the fundamental nature of all forms of government.
I suggest that liberty can only be measured in a bottom up manner (individuals vs. society, provinces vs. their nation, nations vs. the world). Given non-vague enumeration of an individual's rights, his liberty can be objectively observed and measured; not so a society. Society's rights are the collective will of the people which you can attempt to measure but what you receive as a result is not a boolean answer as to whether a right has been infringed or not but a statistic. Given that both lies and damned lies can scoff at statistics from a moral high ground, that makes them completely unacceptable data when dealing with something as fundamentally important as liberty. It also means politicians will instantly fall in love with them.
All that being said, I'm not in favor of either way if taken to the extreme. Most anything taken to its logical end ends up looking absurd except to the foolish or the mad. I simply favor giving up as little liberty as absolutely necessary to maintain the stability of the nation. Everything else I will happily take care of on my own.
You have a very odd idea of what people want out of society but that's off-topic enough I'll let it go.
As for others actions indirectly, adversely affecting you? That's life. Get used to it because it is never going to change. We're not entitled or promised a safety net and anyone trying to give us one wants our freedom as the price. A bit here and another bit there; eventually it's gone.
Considering secondary and higher order removal of effects is just a way to talk yourself into taking away the freedoms of others for their own good. That, my tyrannical friend, is just as bad as taking them away for personal gain or spite without the benefit of at least being honest about it.
If an exchange wants to take prudent steps to keep their market from inadvertently getting hosed, more power to them. It's their sandbox they're inviting others to play in. The government butting its nose in is another thing entirely. If for no other reason, then because they have an abysmal track record of not screwing things up worse than before.
The thing is, if people don't have the freedom to be both panicky idiots and greedy fuckers who're happy to take advantage of that, they're not free at all. Freedom is the government leaving alone unless you're screwing with someone else's freedom; only letting you do what's morally right by their standards is the basis for most oppression.
So, yeah, let them make money off people who aren't as good at stock trading as fast as they like. Doing otherwise would basically be telling them they're not allowed to make any more money because you find the amount they already have distasteful. Pretty much 100% sour grapes.
Not actually true. We could absolutely spank the hell out of the previous peak if it was financially worthwhile. It simply costs far more time and money to produce oil in the US than it does in most of the world. Part of the reason is location, part of it is hippies. Blame whichever your political leanings are more comfortable with.
Actually, no. You could just add in pre-selected advertisements, write it out to standard non-drm video types, and call it a final version. You could then charge more since the ad space you sold would feature the buyers' commercials for a certain value of forever. If you still wanted to use flash or such to insert dynamic ads into streamed versions, you could. It would be a little bit more complicated but doable.
The difference is that you have to download the entire file before you can watch it. You know this. So you should know that anybody can just skip past the ads in anything they downloaded. This is harder to do with streams or broadcast TV.
If you wait just a few minutes to let your dvr or flash player as appropriate buffer, you can do that just fine now. If people really don't want to watch commercials, they won't. Period.
I don't imagine they'd create region-specific torrents either because even the idea has tremendous problems.
Really? I could script automatic commercial insertion with freely available tools in under an hour. Add a little more time and I could have my DNS server pointing you to a region appropriate page to pull a torrent, direct download, or stream with those region appropriate ads from. And unlike now, you wouldn't be sharing revenue from the ads with your distribution method of choice; you would get every penny. Further, you would have a far more accurate count of how many people watched your programming via that method than Nielsen could ever give.
A paying customer who smokes in a resturant that does not allow smoking will be asked to extinguish their vice of choice. If they don't, they are informed that their custom is no longer desired.
Abide by the rules or GTFO is not a new concept in the business world.
I love me some "warrior" MOS guys but it really, really matters. You want someone coming into the job already possessing the necessary skills, because training a system/network security expert up to competence would take years.
Slashdot Mirror
No... I wouldn't assume that any more than I would assume any recessive trait would die out if those it showed in couldn't reproduce. There would still be plenty of carriers.
That particular story was likely targeted at those who see money as something desirable rather than as a tool. Possibly it was actually a true story and that particular guy needed to learn that lesson himself. There's nothing innately evil about having money; there's nothing innately good about it either. Like guys with small schlongs say, it's all in how you use it.
Not everyone else, just the assholes. You just noticed the assholes because the folks who weren't didn't feel the need to make sure you were as big an asshole as them by shoving their beliefs down your throat.
Probably, one of these days. At least if it's like everyone keeps saying and gay people are born that way and it's not a conscious choice. Kind of screams genetic, yeah?
Eh, no. Bible Jesus might have told you socialism was a fine way to live but would never have advocated forcing it on anyone. He was pretty big on trying to show you a better way to live but not at the expense of your free will. Libertarian maybe?
Side note: the eye of a needle is what the barely man-sized gates used for bringing livestock in through fortified walls were called. Difficult but not quite the hyperbole it's been made into. Remember, it's the love of money, not money itself, that's called the root of all evil.
American Jesus is the same Jesus. Every nation has assholes.
Service packs = free
New releases = fat, greasy wads of cash
s/other//
You realize you just doomed yourself, yeah? Want to ask what could possibly go wrong while you're at it?
Oh, sure, like you've never run out of gas.
While I'm inclined to agree that any remotely commercial website should offer and default to encrypted transfers, it also serves you right if you use a service that doesn't encrypt everything. Using a service that doesn't at least offer you the option of encryption is akin to driving a car that you know has defective brakes (ha, car analogy!). If shit goes badly and you knew better, you've no one to blame but yourself. If you didn't know better, it's your own fault for not educating yourself about such basic things and I shall mock you.
Unless you're a cookie baking grandmother willing to bribe me with baked goods. Principles be damned when there are fresh, warm cookies involved.
What you say in jest, I say in seriousness. Fortunately it usually happens over many lifetimes.
Ah, see there, just because something gets called a type of liberty doesn't make it liberty much in the way that mountain oysters are most assuredly not oysters.
Participation in government is not liberty of any sort. It is abdication of easily defined individual liberty in exchange for comfort, security, and someone to blame if things don't go your way. That is the fundamental nature of all forms of government.
I suggest that liberty can only be measured in a bottom up manner (individuals vs. society, provinces vs. their nation, nations vs. the world). Given non-vague enumeration of an individual's rights, his liberty can be objectively observed and measured; not so a society. Society's rights are the collective will of the people which you can attempt to measure but what you receive as a result is not a boolean answer as to whether a right has been infringed or not but a statistic. Given that both lies and damned lies can scoff at statistics from a moral high ground, that makes them completely unacceptable data when dealing with something as fundamentally important as liberty. It also means politicians will instantly fall in love with them.
All that being said, I'm not in favor of either way if taken to the extreme. Most anything taken to its logical end ends up looking absurd except to the foolish or the mad. I simply favor giving up as little liberty as absolutely necessary to maintain the stability of the nation. Everything else I will happily take care of on my own.
You have a very odd idea of what people want out of society but that's off-topic enough I'll let it go.
As for others actions indirectly, adversely affecting you? That's life. Get used to it because it is never going to change. We're not entitled or promised a safety net and anyone trying to give us one wants our freedom as the price. A bit here and another bit there; eventually it's gone.
Considering secondary and higher order removal of effects is just a way to talk yourself into taking away the freedoms of others for their own good. That, my tyrannical friend, is just as bad as taking them away for personal gain or spite without the benefit of at least being honest about it.
If an exchange wants to take prudent steps to keep their market from inadvertently getting hosed, more power to them. It's their sandbox they're inviting others to play in. The government butting its nose in is another thing entirely. If for no other reason, then because they have an abysmal track record of not screwing things up worse than before.
The thing is, if people don't have the freedom to be both panicky idiots and greedy fuckers who're happy to take advantage of that, they're not free at all. Freedom is the government leaving alone unless you're screwing with someone else's freedom; only letting you do what's morally right by their standards is the basis for most oppression.
So, yeah, let them make money off people who aren't as good at stock trading as fast as they like. Doing otherwise would basically be telling them they're not allowed to make any more money because you find the amount they already have distasteful. Pretty much 100% sour grapes.
Not actually true. We could absolutely spank the hell out of the previous peak if it was financially worthwhile. It simply costs far more time and money to produce oil in the US than it does in most of the world. Part of the reason is location, part of it is hippies. Blame whichever your political leanings are more comfortable with.
Actually, no. You could just add in pre-selected advertisements, write it out to standard non-drm video types, and call it a final version. You could then charge more since the ad space you sold would feature the buyers' commercials for a certain value of forever. If you still wanted to use flash or such to insert dynamic ads into streamed versions, you could. It would be a little bit more complicated but doable.
Not for each user, for each region they choose to define to market ads to.
The difference is that you have to download the entire file before you can watch it. You know this. So you should know that anybody can just skip past the ads in anything they downloaded. This is harder to do with streams or broadcast TV.
If you wait just a few minutes to let your dvr or flash player as appropriate buffer, you can do that just fine now. If people really don't want to watch commercials, they won't. Period.
I don't imagine they'd create region-specific torrents either because even the idea has tremendous problems.
Really? I could script automatic commercial insertion with freely available tools in under an hour. Add a little more time and I could have my DNS server pointing you to a region appropriate page to pull a torrent, direct download, or stream with those region appropriate ads from. And unlike now, you wouldn't be sharing revenue from the ads with your distribution method of choice; you would get every penny. Further, you would have a far more accurate count of how many people watched your programming via that method than Nielsen could ever give.
Tell me again why it's a bad idea?
Or you could just say "that's what you get for not evolving to fit your environment, bitches". You know, the way nature intended.
If you screw with the ability to function of any common carrier, your ass will be booted. It is not a new or unique to ISPs concept.
A paying customer who smokes in a resturant that does not allow smoking will be asked to extinguish their vice of choice. If they don't, they are informed that their custom is no longer desired.
Abide by the rules or GTFO is not a new concept in the business world.
Not particularly. The training for a "warrior" MOS is generally pretty short, with a few exceptions.
Right, but think about the length of AIT for someone who's a dead noob but got a good ASVAB score. The skills really need to exist first.
I love me some "warrior" MOS guys but it really, really matters. You want someone coming into the job already possessing the necessary skills, because training a system/network security expert up to competence would take years.