Since you do not have the freedom to kill people, owning the means to do so does not give you any greater freedom.
Now if you are arguing for hunting and the like - well frankly then there is absolutely NO reason to believe your argument should extend to weaponry which applies SOLELY to the purpose of killing HUMANS with..These weapons aren't even very useful for self-defense. Frankly NOBODY actually has any NEED for them EXCEPT for murderers or wannabe murderers.
-I assume you are talking about a semi-automatic rifle with scary attachments on it. The AR-15 is less dangerous then a typical semiautomatic 308 hunting rifle. Is it the smaller barrel size that makes it scary? So if I take my standard AR-15 buy a larger barrel and a magazine to hold the larger bullets the gun is OK in your mind?
-The 223 is a popular round for sport shooting which apparently you didn't know existed.
Your freedom ends where mine begins - and mine includes the right to NOT be around that kind of weapons, in the same way it includes the right to ask you to NOT smoke in my vicinity.
How exactly does a OWNING a semi automatic rifle with scary attachments cause you any harm? At least with smoke there are known health risks. What other things should be banned because people have an irrational fear of and the person scared of them doesn't know what they are used for. Swords? Knives? Daggers? Mace? Axes? Spears? Catapults? Clowns? Snakes? Spiders? Mice? Rats? Dogs? Cats? Birds?...
All the things you can legally do with a gun, are best achieved with guns which are essentially unaffected by gun control laws.
The only people who benefit from fighting it are gun-manufacturers
How about putting a pistol grip and a scope on a rifle, it will make it more accurate and easier to shoot but because it has two military type attachments it would be banned. The same rifle with just a scope would not be banned, neither would the gun if it had the pistol grip and steel sights, but a pistol grip and a scope makes it dangerous? Essentially that is what the current gun control law is, two guns can have the same rate of fire, caliber, accuracy, and velocity but because one has more attachments it is illegal. It would be like banning cars from having more then one racing feature on them, a rear spoiler and a ground body kit would make the car illegal.
Sure they did. They absolutely fleeced the public. Believe it or not, there is this thing called ethics that calls for even a profit seeking organization to honestly meet a customer's needs rather than going crazy with the oversell.
The sooner we as a society remember that, the sooner things will improve.
The customers needs were 1100 routers and it needs to cost as close to $24 million as possible with out going over. Should Cisco refuse to sell to the schools on the grounds that they are wasting money?
"Not Performed Legally"?
"'legally unauthorized purchasing process"?
So, the opposite of legal... would be illegal.
Also: "Cisco showed a wanton indifference to the interests of the public"
Really, a profit driven company tried to fleece the public? I'm shocked, shocked like a man making toast in the bath!
Cisco did not fleece the public they put in their proposal and the government accepted it, this has all the markings of money burning a hole in the auditors pocket. The auditor had $24 million to spend so they spent it, they don't care if they had a cheaper option, they wanted the best they could get for the money they had, even if they didn't need it. Unfortunately the way government spending works is you are expected to spend every dime they give you. If you don't spend it all then you are punished by getting less or none next time around.
Left : more personal freedom, less economic freedom.
Right : more economic freedom, less personal freedom.
The left right spectrum is a poor way to judge these things, personal freedoms like guns, who they can hire (discrimination laws, closed shop laws), and what schools public money can be used for (charter schools), are all personal freedoms that most conservatives believe in. The two big freedoms that many conservatives oppose is abortion, they believe the baby's right to live supersedes the mother's right to choose, and gay marriage, which they believe is a religious sacrament, I personally believe that the government should not treat people any different married or not and should not be performing religious sacraments.
Most of these contradictions are due to pandering, so a simple political spectrum line no where near defines conservative and liberal, there is no universal definition.
I don't see how universal background checks are at the expense of freedoms anymore than a driver's license, fishing license, hunting license etc is.
You don't need a government license to do any of those things on your property, depending on the state, you can hunt, fish, and drive all you want with no licenses, it is only when you start hunting, fishing, and driving on public roads, lakes, and land that you need a license. When one person sells a good to another there is no use of pubic lands to do so, it is out of the public realm.
If the Wii has taught us anything its that the casual gamer market is very powerful, second hand games and rentals are a good way to introduce people to your game. The game producers don't care what the hardcore gamer thinks, they are going to get them to buy no matter how bad they treat them, it's the casual gamer that will choose to buy a game or not that makes it a success. If you want to influence the game makers you need to influence the buyer that does not have to have the game.
In the script I saw there were ewoks in the refrigerator, one had a crystal skull that opened a worm hole that allowed the force ghosts to come back to life.
That would be slightly disgusting, but hey, if screwing with meat floats your boat....
Personally I don't mind animals suffering for my pleasure - in fact, looking at my gadgets and my way of living, I'd go as far as apparently, I don't mind humans suffering for my pleasure. I wear clothes produced by cheap labor in India, I use computers produced by cheap labor in China, I eat meat produced under horrible conditions; however, it does make my life pretty nice.
There is an old saying: two wrongs don't make a right.
We are conscious of our actions and can therefore exercise control over what we choose to consume. Food is one of our most basic requirements for survival but meat is a luxury, and demonstrably not necessary to function in society. Choosing a vegetarian lifestyle will help put an end to the needless suffering of animals, and is a "good" choice for many other reasons including sustainability and the environment.
Peace,
Andy.
It doesn't seem like the he thinks mistreating animals and people is right, is more like he just doesn't care if they are mistreated as long as his food is delicious and electronics are cheap.
It is possible but you would have to jam all the Rx antennas to accomplish this, you would have to send a different signal to each Rx antenna if you sent the same signal from a single location it can be corrected for, being passive it may be difficult to locate all the antennas to jam them. The system works by using each Rx antenna's range and doppler readings and finding a common location for those ranges and speed. What I wonder is what will happen when sun sets, the ionosphere becomes unstable at sunrise and the sun setting and could jam these systems, not being able to track planes at night would be a huge problem. Australia has a system called JORN that uses a multiple Rx antenna setup the only difference is that they don't modulate information on that signal, as long as you know the Tx signal the modulation can be corrected for.
You sound like one of the people who told the Wright brothers they'll never fly. Or maybe you're that 1920s New York Times editor who said that rocketry is junk science and would never get us to space let alone the moon.
The NASA timeline for a manned mission to mars is 2037 if is very possible that the time line will slip and miss the next two decades mark. It's not that we can't do it it's just that many things must go right for us to achieve this goal by 2040.
"Back to the video, the REAL point that was being made was that billions of YOUR tax dollars have been flushed down failed companies who have far more talent in kicking back their government investments rather than actually producing energy."
I might believe that Fox cared about that if they had been as vigorously opposed to the multi-billion dollar fiasco that was the Iraq war, which included just as much corruption via-a-vis Hallibuton, et. al.
I'd believe it if they rallied against the 10-54 billion (depending on how you count) subsidies we give to fossil fuel companies, who rake in trillions in profits. Half-billion to a failed solar company is bad, but not as bad as 10+ billion to already established, ridiculously-profitable industries.
You are very misinformed, lets look at big oil they do about 1.4 trillion is sales 10% of the GDP so they don't rake in trillions in profits, further most of those funds don't go to large companies but smaller exploration companies. Also Big oil is not as profitable as you may think, oil and gas is 8.7%, crude mining is 11.5%, Oil Refining is 2.1%.
What is wrong with programming drunk, at two or three beverages you are considered drunk. On a Friday with a deadline approaching nothing helps calm the nerves like a few beers. I do some masterful work when I have a beer or two in me. It seems like having a beer or three is lumped in with getting frat boy drunk and programming. Shitty code comes from shitty programmers with shitty standards, about the only thing I will do differently when I'm programming while drinking is sneak in a few lewd names for variables (I named the max and min current values c_max and c_min) or add "PC load Letter" and "ID 10 T error" to my error messages.
It is not just a consistent base for measurement but using the same base for counting and measuring, the metric system would be crap if we had a 16 base system.
There would be very little difference signature wise from a wet road to an iced over road, that difference would be much lower then the natural variations in the road, making it impossible to distinguish.
" You get paid to work, not deal with personal matters."
Amen brother!
This view illustrates that people at work are busy organizing their private lives, making doctor's appointments, calling family, brokers, schools, daycare, tweeting nonsense and updating their online presence and other crap instead of doing their fucking job and they apparently feel entitled to it.
We allow personal laptops and smart phones but we have two internal networks one that is for the unclean and one for verified systems. The unclean network only allows access to to the internet and a few of our internal systems, email, calendars, and contacts, only stuff that is exposed to the outside all ready. Plugging in an unverified computer into the clean network will usually cause our IT guy to come find the person. I got dinged for that after plugging in a Micro-Controler board that was not recognized by the network in about 5 minutes.
Sorry to nitpick but a semi-automatic rifle is not an assault rifle, there is a big difference between semi automatic and automatic rifles even if they look the same. 30 rounds in 3 seconds is a big difference from 30 rounds in 20 seconds. To be honest an untrained person with an automatic rifle will be able to do a lot less damage then with a semi-automatic rifle mostly because they will run through ammo so quick, having shot an automatic ar-15 I can verify that control is difficult even with a muzzle break.
MP's are specifically trained not to exempt officers from the rules, I heard many stories of officers spending a few hours in the brig waiting for their commanding officer to come get them out for trying to intimidate enlisted MP's. Those kinds of incidents are what stops or severely slows down the career path of many officers that thought they were above the rules.
Slashdot Mirror
Since you do not have the freedom to kill people, owning the means to do so does not give you any greater freedom.
Now if you are arguing for hunting and the like - well frankly then there is absolutely NO reason to believe your argument should extend to weaponry which applies SOLELY to the purpose of killing HUMANS with..These weapons aren't even very useful for self-defense. Frankly NOBODY actually has any NEED for them EXCEPT for murderers or wannabe murderers.
-I assume you are talking about a semi-automatic rifle with scary attachments on it. The AR-15 is less dangerous then a typical semiautomatic 308 hunting rifle. Is it the smaller barrel size that makes it scary? So if I take my standard AR-15 buy a larger barrel and a magazine to hold the larger bullets the gun is OK in your mind?
-The 223 is a popular round for sport shooting which apparently you didn't know existed.
Your freedom ends where mine begins - and mine includes the right to NOT be around that kind of weapons, in the same way it includes the right to ask you to NOT smoke in my vicinity.
How exactly does a OWNING a semi automatic rifle with scary attachments cause you any harm? At least with smoke there are known health risks. What other things should be banned because people have an irrational fear of and the person scared of them doesn't know what they are used for. Swords? Knives? Daggers? Mace? Axes? Spears? Catapults? Clowns? Snakes? Spiders? Mice? Rats? Dogs? Cats? Birds? ...
All the things you can legally do with a gun, are best achieved with guns which are essentially unaffected by gun control laws.
The only people who benefit from fighting it are gun-manufacturers
How about putting a pistol grip and a scope on a rifle, it will make it more accurate and easier to shoot but because it has two military type attachments it would be banned. The same rifle with just a scope would not be banned, neither would the gun if it had the pistol grip and steel sights, but a pistol grip and a scope makes it dangerous? Essentially that is what the current gun control law is, two guns can have the same rate of fire, caliber, accuracy, and velocity but because one has more attachments it is illegal. It would be like banning cars from having more then one racing feature on them, a rear spoiler and a ground body kit would make the car illegal.
Sure they did. They absolutely fleeced the public. Believe it or not, there is this thing called ethics that calls for even a profit seeking organization to honestly meet a customer's needs rather than going crazy with the oversell.
The sooner we as a society remember that, the sooner things will improve.
The customers needs were 1100 routers and it needs to cost as close to $24 million as possible with out going over. Should Cisco refuse to sell to the schools on the grounds that they are wasting money?
"Not Performed Legally"? "'legally unauthorized purchasing process"?
So, the opposite of legal... would be illegal.
Also: "Cisco showed a wanton indifference to the interests of the public"
Really, a profit driven company tried to fleece the public? I'm shocked, shocked like a man making toast in the bath!
Cisco did not fleece the public they put in their proposal and the government accepted it, this has all the markings of money burning a hole in the auditors pocket. The auditor had $24 million to spend so they spent it, they don't care if they had a cheaper option, they wanted the best they could get for the money they had, even if they didn't need it. Unfortunately the way government spending works is you are expected to spend every dime they give you. If you don't spend it all then you are punished by getting less or none next time around.
Or how about keeping everyone's freedoms, and not making knee jerk reactions to isolated instances.
Left : more personal freedom, less economic freedom. Right : more economic freedom, less personal freedom.
The left right spectrum is a poor way to judge these things, personal freedoms like guns, who they can hire (discrimination laws, closed shop laws), and what schools public money can be used for (charter schools), are all personal freedoms that most conservatives believe in. The two big freedoms that many conservatives oppose is abortion, they believe the baby's right to live supersedes the mother's right to choose, and gay marriage, which they believe is a religious sacrament, I personally believe that the government should not treat people any different married or not and should not be performing religious sacraments.
Most of these contradictions are due to pandering, so a simple political spectrum line no where near defines conservative and liberal, there is no universal definition.
I don't see how universal background checks are at the expense of freedoms anymore than a driver's license, fishing license, hunting license etc is.
You don't need a government license to do any of those things on your property, depending on the state, you can hunt, fish, and drive all you want with no licenses, it is only when you start hunting, fishing, and driving on public roads, lakes, and land that you need a license. When one person sells a good to another there is no use of pubic lands to do so, it is out of the public realm.
If the Wii has taught us anything its that the casual gamer market is very powerful, second hand games and rentals are a good way to introduce people to your game. The game producers don't care what the hardcore gamer thinks, they are going to get them to buy no matter how bad they treat them, it's the casual gamer that will choose to buy a game or not that makes it a success. If you want to influence the game makers you need to influence the buyer that does not have to have the game.
That's how I got my last tetanus vaccination, I stepped on a rusty nail and a syringe with the vaccination.
In the script I saw there were ewoks in the refrigerator, one had a crystal skull that opened a worm hole that allowed the force ghosts to come back to life.
That would be slightly disgusting, but hey, if screwing with meat floats your boat....
Personally I don't mind animals suffering for my pleasure - in fact, looking at my gadgets and my way of living, I'd go as far as apparently, I don't mind humans suffering for my pleasure. I wear clothes produced by cheap labor in India, I use computers produced by cheap labor in China, I eat meat produced under horrible conditions; however, it does make my life pretty nice.
There is an old saying: two wrongs don't make a right.
We are conscious of our actions and can therefore exercise control over what we choose to consume. Food is one of our most basic requirements for survival but meat is a luxury, and demonstrably not necessary to function in society. Choosing a vegetarian lifestyle will help put an end to the needless suffering of animals, and is a "good" choice for many other reasons including sustainability and the environment.
Peace, Andy.
It doesn't seem like the he thinks mistreating animals and people is right, is more like he just doesn't care if they are mistreated as long as his food is delicious and electronics are cheap.
It is possible but you would have to jam all the Rx antennas to accomplish this, you would have to send a different signal to each Rx antenna if you sent the same signal from a single location it can be corrected for, being passive it may be difficult to locate all the antennas to jam them. The system works by using each Rx antenna's range and doppler readings and finding a common location for those ranges and speed. What I wonder is what will happen when sun sets, the ionosphere becomes unstable at sunrise and the sun setting and could jam these systems, not being able to track planes at night would be a huge problem. Australia has a system called JORN that uses a multiple Rx antenna setup the only difference is that they don't modulate information on that signal, as long as you know the Tx signal the modulation can be corrected for.
You sound like one of the people who told the Wright brothers they'll never fly. Or maybe you're that 1920s New York Times editor who said that rocketry is junk science and would never get us to space let alone the moon.
The NASA timeline for a manned mission to mars is 2037 if is very possible that the time line will slip and miss the next two decades mark. It's not that we can't do it it's just that many things must go right for us to achieve this goal by 2040.
"Back to the video, the REAL point that was being made was that billions of YOUR tax dollars have been flushed down failed companies who have far more talent in kicking back their government investments rather than actually producing energy."
I might believe that Fox cared about that if they had been as vigorously opposed to the multi-billion dollar fiasco that was the Iraq war, which included just as much corruption via-a-vis Hallibuton, et. al.
I'd believe it if they rallied against the 10-54 billion (depending on how you count) subsidies we give to fossil fuel companies, who rake in trillions in profits. Half-billion to a failed solar company is bad, but not as bad as 10+ billion to already established, ridiculously-profitable industries.
You are very misinformed, lets look at big oil they do about 1.4 trillion is sales 10% of the GDP so they don't rake in trillions in profits, further most of those funds don't go to large companies but smaller exploration companies. Also Big oil is not as profitable as you may think, oil and gas is 8.7%, crude mining is 11.5%, Oil Refining is 2.1%.
What is wrong with programming drunk, at two or three beverages you are considered drunk. On a Friday with a deadline approaching nothing helps calm the nerves like a few beers. I do some masterful work when I have a beer or two in me. It seems like having a beer or three is lumped in with getting frat boy drunk and programming. Shitty code comes from shitty programmers with shitty standards, about the only thing I will do differently when I'm programming while drinking is sneak in a few lewd names for variables (I named the max and min current values c_max and c_min) or add "PC load Letter" and "ID 10 T error" to my error messages.
Liberals want subsidies for people and select companies, republicans want subsidies for companies and conservatives want subsidies to be gone.
No but the lists would prevent the people I see buying nothing but junkfood and soda.
No it doesn't it just stops them from buying liquor and cigarets.
microwave radar = radar
It is not just a consistent base for measurement but using the same base for counting and measuring, the metric system would be crap if we had a 16 base system.
No it is off bay a little bit 1000CC of water = 1L = 0.999975 kg at 4C which is as dense as water gets.
There would be very little difference signature wise from a wet road to an iced over road, that difference would be much lower then the natural variations in the road, making it impossible to distinguish.
If this thing works well the word I am trying to read will be covered up by the cursor.
" You get paid to work, not deal with personal matters."
Amen brother! This view illustrates that people at work are busy organizing their private lives, making doctor's appointments, calling family, brokers, schools, daycare, tweeting nonsense and updating their online presence and other crap instead of doing their fucking job and they apparently feel entitled to it.
Your forgot /.
We allow personal laptops and smart phones but we have two internal networks one that is for the unclean and one for verified systems. The unclean network only allows access to to the internet and a few of our internal systems, email, calendars, and contacts, only stuff that is exposed to the outside all ready. Plugging in an unverified computer into the clean network will usually cause our IT guy to come find the person. I got dinged for that after plugging in a Micro-Controler board that was not recognized by the network in about 5 minutes.
Sorry to nitpick but a semi-automatic rifle is not an assault rifle, there is a big difference between semi automatic and automatic rifles even if they look the same. 30 rounds in 3 seconds is a big difference from 30 rounds in 20 seconds. To be honest an untrained person with an automatic rifle will be able to do a lot less damage then with a semi-automatic rifle mostly because they will run through ammo so quick, having shot an automatic ar-15 I can verify that control is difficult even with a muzzle break.
MP's are specifically trained not to exempt officers from the rules, I heard many stories of officers spending a few hours in the brig waiting for their commanding officer to come get them out for trying to intimidate enlisted MP's. Those kinds of incidents are what stops or severely slows down the career path of many officers that thought they were above the rules.