This is the same community that you can still start a street fight, or at least a troll war, by asking "Which is better: emacs or vi?" I'm not sure they're ever going to get over this. But, like the above question, the world will move on and leave them behind.
But the OS works with either vi or emacs (or heaven forbid both) installed; you can only have a single init system
Yeah, but what educated person believes a blastocyst is "alive"?
Can you empirically tell me at what point a group of cells starts being "alive"? Or, if you're religious, at what point the spirit enters that ball of cells?
My objections to the ACA? It raised my premiums 200% for similar coverage. It forces everyone to have health insurance (or pay the tax penalty), meaning that insurance companies can charge what they want.
As opposed to what? The government mandating prices?
If you meant that insurance company profits peak at an unresonably high profit margin level, isn't that what the market is supposed to take care of?
If the government mandates that everyone purchase a product (such as health insurance), then there is no incentive for those selling that product not to fix prices. Such a mandate gets rid of most rules of an open market.
What is it specifically you object to about the ACA? Covering more people? You do realize the whole idea behind any health insurance is that healthy people support the unhealthy. My main objection to it is that it let the health insurance companies and their "death panels" ("actuaries" to you) live. It has only been since the 1960's that insurance companies have gotten into health insurance in a big way. And we can mark the cost rises for health care to them.
My objections to the ACA? It raised my premiums 200% for similar coverage. It forces everyone to have health insurance (or pay the tax penalty), meaning that insurance companies can charge what they want. No one knew what was in the 2000+ pages before it was passed (with the promise they could read it later).
I like that insurance companies can't deny coverage based on preexisting conditions.
Posting anonymously since I've voted on other posts: I don't think 99% of people would care that non-human cloning it erases a potential life. We end actual animal lives all the time for food, sport, or simply out of carelessness.
Concerns about cross-species surrogacy (that could kill the mother, a species with problems of its own), creating social animals with no living members of the species to acculturate it, and of course, spending millions of dollars that could (arguably) be better spent preserving extant species all seem like more likely ethical concerns.
I'm against ending animal life for sport, but support hunting for food and being good stewards of the land. I feel that animals deserve humane treatment - if you are going to harvest an animal for food, kill it in the most painless way reasonably possible.
Well, yeah, but you wouldn't be using a human zygote for this. Seems like only the 3 craziest members of PETA in the world would have an ethical problem with this...
I don't understand... what would be unethical about this?
Study up on how cloning works. You take a zygote (fertilized egg), then wipe its genetic code, replacing it with the desired genetic code. The ethics come into play int he wiping stage. If you believe that life begins at conception, you could easily view wiping the genetic code from a zygote as killing the (potential) life.
Sadly, the US has this too with "Free Speech Zones." If the President is driving down the street or a political convention is being held in your city and you want to peacefully hold up a sign protesting a policy of theirs, you are free to do so... in a specially designated zone that is actually nowhere near where they are. We wouldn't want our leaders to see opposition to their efforts, would we? Yes, we have a first Amendment, but the courts have ruled that "make no law... abridging the freedom of speech... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances" really means that you CAN decide WHERE the people protest so long as you don't prohibit the content of their protests. So you're free to say whatever you want, so long as it is in this gated cage with an armed guard miles away from the person/people you are protesting.
I have visited Salt Lake City, Utah, during the General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I couldn't be more grateful for those Free Speech Zones. Before these zones got put into place, I was physically grabbed by protesters. I'm fine with peaceful, respectful protesters, but once my physical safety is threatened, it's time to do something.
I understand your point here, but if he wasn't actually found guilty of whatever they're trying to prosecute him with, he's still innocent until proven guilty. To do what you suggest, would allow the government to prevent a plaintiff from seeking legal recourse because they're awaiting prosecution of an unrelated issue.
Isn't resisting arrest a crime? Isn't ignoring a subpoena a crime? He may (or may not) be guilty of the original crime, but he's definitely guilty of subsequent ones.
Do you know WHY they use 40+ year old Russian engines? Because they are better than anything West has to offer.
It seems to me that in order to be better, they have to deliver their payload, and not explode. When they blow up, their effectiveness falls off to zero real quick.
From what I understand, the rocket was veering off course, so they activated a self-destruct mechanism.
What a load of Mormon-like nonsense!!! They like to think of Jesus as a space traveller.
You said nothing valuable here, just read your Mormon-like beliefs into the text where it suited you, and ignored everything else (like divine sea monsters in Genesis 1:21 that translators gloss over with "large sea creatures", "big fish" or "whales").
That poster never identified himself as Mormon. Additionally, your understanding of Mormon beliefs is flawed. Mormons do not believe that Jesus is a space traveler. We believe he was born in Bethlehem (in the land of Jerusalem) to Mary. He learned line up line and precept on precept. Please visit mormon.org to learn what we really believe instead of parroting what our enemies claim we believe.
People who regularly drink Coke (or Barq's Rootbeer), Pepsi, or Dr.Pepper, consume about as much caffine as drinking a similar amount of coffee.
In Utah, Barq's Rootbeer doesn't have caffeine. Even with the others, most coffee has more caffeine per fluid ounce than the sodas you mention:
Espresso: 51mg / floz
Regular Coffee: 20mg/floz
Instant Coffee: 7mg/floz
Barq's Rootbeer: 2mg/floz
Coke Classic: 3mg/floz
Pepsi: 3.2mg/floz
Dr. Pepper: 3.5mg/floz
I would like to think that reasonable people knew what he meant, but there are a lot of crazy Fox News people out there. Still, they could have used a better term.
Unfortunately I don't think crazy is limited by political leanings.
I just heard that Obama wants SWAT teams to react to diagnosed Ebola cases. Talk about discouraging good behavior. I guess that is a more aggressive stance. If the host is dead, the disease will die too.
As much as I dislike Obama, I must respect the office. Obama wasn't talking SWAT teams with guns and other weapons, he was talking about rapid response teams specially trained in Ebola and other diseases. I want to believe you already knew that and just wanted to stir the pot.
And, yeah, I'm in HR. I value long probationary periods - paid, of course, but at a lower rate while training is provided: IOW I care more about your reasoning skills than buzzwords on your resume.
It's people like you that caused me to go through six months as an hourly employee, zero overtime allowed, no paid vacation, no PTO accumulation, no matching contributions to my 401(k), etc. During six months I could have accumulated over 60 hours of PTO, plus my official time as an employee starts after the six months when giving me the five years of service raise. I hate buzzwords as much as the rest, but you don't need a long probationary period to find out if an employee padded their CV.
If your other race car is a 64 mustang or a corvette, range wasn't a concern in the first place.
I don't have a race car. I want a vehicle designed for real world conditions. My current car gets about 500 miles to the tank and fills up in 15-20 minutes when the tank's empty.
The sorts of people that hate electric because it's a "hippie thing" will embrace it because the fact of the matter is that, in the end, it just performs better. Can't have hippies beating your Cudda with a Prius.
I'm still waiting on range and charging time to make it worth my investment. With a range of 200 miles per full charge, this car would meet my daily needs 85% of the time. I'd still need something for road trips.
How you do figure that? 100k is upper middle class, or there about.
Where do you live that 100k per year is considered middle class? I've been a professional software engineer for 14 years and don't make that kind of dough. Of course you have to take into account the cost of living for my state, and the fact that workers here earn about 75-80% of the national average.
Only if you are willing to spend more than half your yearly income on a car.
16k a year for the top end model. That's only around 1/3rd of your income if you make the median income of the US (~51k). And having the median income puts you far, far away from the top 1%.
When talking fractions of yearly income do you count gross or net pay? I would never spend 1/3 of my net income on a car, unless I could pay cash.
Totally true. They confabulate genius with autistic savant, they misrepresent what genius (or autistic savants) can do, and generally have no idea how "normal" people react.
The basic problem is that the writers are not smart, let alone geniuses, so they simply do not know enough to write a show about geniuses.
I say the same thing about The Big Bang Theory. Not everyone with a high IQ is socially awkward or OCD. For better or worse, the show is written to appeal to its intended audience. Hackers, The Matrix, and Jurassic Park took liberties to try and show "normals" how the world appears to hackers.
I'll start being pro-life when the pro-life folk stop being anti-contraception.
I'm all for preventing conception (the pill, condoms, surgeries, etc), but firmly believe that once fertilization takes place the zygote should be protected in most cases (one obvious exception is a pregnancy resulting from rape). Only subgroups in the pro-life camp (such as the Catholic Church) speak out against contraception. Even though I use contraceptives myself, I believe that students be taught that abstinence is the only contraceptive method which is 100% effective all the time. Teach the risks of each method (for example, a small number of condoms tear) so students can make an informed decision. Don't use scare tactics or guilt trips.
Have they been using the identity of real people to catch pervs? While I want the pervs off the streets, I'm not ok with them using someone's identity without that person's explicit permission.
I thought people around here generally thought the concept of prosecuting for thoughtcrimes was disgusting? And yet here you are, saying that "all those pervo scumbags should be locked up forever!" How about we lock up the ones who actually do something (child molesters), and leave the ones who can't help that they have disfunctional sexual attractions but never act on them (pedophiles) alone, or at worst make them attend mandatory counciling (PedophilesAnonymous perhaps?)? Pedophilia does not mean child molester.
You are putting words into my mouth. I have often said that being tempted isn't a sin, but acting upon the temptation is. Police set up fake profiles in places where they meet scumbags. Those scumbags who solicit sex and go to the house (eg. those who act on their temptations) are the ones who are caught and taken off the streets. We only know that a person has these attractions because they've done or said something to tip it.
Slashdot Mirror
This is the same community that you can still start a street fight, or at least a troll war, by asking "Which is better: emacs or vi?" I'm not sure they're ever going to get over this. But, like the above question, the world will move on and leave them behind.
But the OS works with either vi or emacs (or heaven forbid both) installed; you can only have a single init system
Yeah, but what educated person believes a blastocyst is "alive"?
Can you empirically tell me at what point a group of cells starts being "alive"? Or, if you're religious, at what point the spirit enters that ball of cells?
As opposed to what? The government mandating prices?
If you meant that insurance company profits peak at an unresonably high profit margin level, isn't that what the market is supposed to take care of?
If the government mandates that everyone purchase a product (such as health insurance), then there is no incentive for those selling that product not to fix prices. Such a mandate gets rid of most rules of an open market.
What is it specifically you object to about the ACA? Covering more people? You do realize the whole idea behind any health insurance is that healthy people support the unhealthy. My main objection to it is that it let the health insurance companies and their "death panels" ("actuaries" to you) live. It has only been since the 1960's that insurance companies have gotten into health insurance in a big way. And we can mark the cost rises for health care to them.
My objections to the ACA? It raised my premiums 200% for similar coverage. It forces everyone to have health insurance (or pay the tax penalty), meaning that insurance companies can charge what they want. No one knew what was in the 2000+ pages before it was passed (with the promise they could read it later).
I like that insurance companies can't deny coverage based on preexisting conditions.
How can you "abort" a fertilized egg that isn't even in a womb?
Abort in this sense means to end. You can abort fertilized eggs by destroying them, cooking them, etc. Abort doesn't mean to remove from the womb.
Posting anonymously since I've voted on other posts: I don't think 99% of people would care that non-human cloning it erases a potential life. We end actual animal lives all the time for food, sport, or simply out of carelessness.
Concerns about cross-species surrogacy (that could kill the mother, a species with problems of its own), creating social animals with no living members of the species to acculturate it, and of course, spending millions of dollars that could (arguably) be better spent preserving extant species all seem like more likely ethical concerns.
I'm against ending animal life for sport, but support hunting for food and being good stewards of the land. I feel that animals deserve humane treatment - if you are going to harvest an animal for food, kill it in the most painless way reasonably possible.
You've never eaten eggs? What do you think eggs are?
The only fertilized eggs that I know people eat are balut. And, no, I don't eat balut.
Well, yeah, but you wouldn't be using a human zygote for this. Seems like only the 3 craziest members of PETA in the world would have an ethical problem with this...
Are you saying it's ethical to abort animals?
I don't understand... what would be unethical about this?
Study up on how cloning works. You take a zygote (fertilized egg), then wipe its genetic code, replacing it with the desired genetic code. The ethics come into play int he wiping stage. If you believe that life begins at conception, you could easily view wiping the genetic code from a zygote as killing the (potential) life.
Constitution shmonstitution, we got us a mujorty! We can do as we likes. First up, let's repeal the goddam 15th.
Republicans also have a majority in the House.
Sadly, the US has this too with "Free Speech Zones." If the President is driving down the street or a political convention is being held in your city and you want to peacefully hold up a sign protesting a policy of theirs, you are free to do so... in a specially designated zone that is actually nowhere near where they are. We wouldn't want our leaders to see opposition to their efforts, would we? Yes, we have a first Amendment, but the courts have ruled that "make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech ... or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances" really means that you CAN decide WHERE the people protest so long as you don't prohibit the content of their protests. So you're free to say whatever you want, so long as it is in this gated cage with an armed guard miles away from the person/people you are protesting.
I have visited Salt Lake City, Utah, during the General Conference of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, and I couldn't be more grateful for those Free Speech Zones. Before these zones got put into place, I was physically grabbed by protesters. I'm fine with peaceful, respectful protesters, but once my physical safety is threatened, it's time to do something.
I understand your point here, but if he wasn't actually found guilty of whatever they're trying to prosecute him with, he's still innocent until proven guilty. To do what you suggest, would allow the government to prevent a plaintiff from seeking legal recourse because they're awaiting prosecution of an unrelated issue.
Isn't resisting arrest a crime? Isn't ignoring a subpoena a crime? He may (or may not) be guilty of the original crime, but he's definitely guilty of subsequent ones.
Do you know WHY they use 40+ year old Russian engines? Because they are better than anything West has to offer.
It seems to me that in order to be better, they have to deliver their payload, and not explode. When they blow up, their effectiveness falls off to zero real quick.
From what I understand, the rocket was veering off course, so they activated a self-destruct mechanism.
What a load of Mormon-like nonsense!!! They like to think of Jesus as a space traveller. You said nothing valuable here, just read your Mormon-like beliefs into the text where it suited you, and ignored everything else (like divine sea monsters in Genesis 1:21 that translators gloss over with "large sea creatures", "big fish" or "whales").
That poster never identified himself as Mormon. Additionally, your understanding of Mormon beliefs is flawed. Mormons do not believe that Jesus is a space traveler. We believe he was born in Bethlehem (in the land of Jerusalem) to Mary. He learned line up line and precept on precept. Please visit mormon.org to learn what we really believe instead of parroting what our enemies claim we believe.
People who regularly drink Coke (or Barq's Rootbeer), Pepsi, or Dr.Pepper, consume about as much caffine as drinking a similar amount of coffee.
In Utah, Barq's Rootbeer doesn't have caffeine. Even with the others, most coffee has more caffeine per fluid ounce than the sodas you mention: /floz
Espresso: 51mg / floz
Regular Coffee: 20mg/floz
Instant Coffee: 7mg
Barq's Rootbeer: 2mg/floz
Coke Classic: 3mg/floz
Pepsi: 3.2mg/floz
Dr. Pepper: 3.5mg/floz
Source: http://www.caffeineinformer.co...
I would like to think that reasonable people knew what he meant, but there are a lot of crazy Fox News people out there. Still, they could have used a better term.
Unfortunately I don't think crazy is limited by political leanings.
I just heard that Obama wants SWAT teams to react to diagnosed Ebola cases. Talk about discouraging good behavior. I guess that is a more aggressive stance. If the host is dead, the disease will die too.
As much as I dislike Obama, I must respect the office. Obama wasn't talking SWAT teams with guns and other weapons, he was talking about rapid response teams specially trained in Ebola and other diseases. I want to believe you already knew that and just wanted to stir the pot.
And, yeah, I'm in HR. I value long probationary periods - paid, of course, but at a lower rate while training is provided: IOW I care more about your reasoning skills than buzzwords on your resume.
It's people like you that caused me to go through six months as an hourly employee, zero overtime allowed, no paid vacation, no PTO accumulation, no matching contributions to my 401(k), etc. During six months I could have accumulated over 60 hours of PTO, plus my official time as an employee starts after the six months when giving me the five years of service raise. I hate buzzwords as much as the rest, but you don't need a long probationary period to find out if an employee padded their CV.
If your other race car is a 64 mustang or a corvette, range wasn't a concern in the first place.
I don't have a race car. I want a vehicle designed for real world conditions. My current car gets about 500 miles to the tank and fills up in 15-20 minutes when the tank's empty.
>
The sorts of people that hate electric because it's a "hippie thing" will embrace it because the fact of the matter is that, in the end, it just performs better. Can't have hippies beating your Cudda with a Prius.
I'm still waiting on range and charging time to make it worth my investment. With a range of 200 miles per full charge, this car would meet my daily needs 85% of the time. I'd still need something for road trips.
How you do figure that? 100k is upper middle class, or there about.
Where do you live that 100k per year is considered middle class? I've been a professional software engineer for 14 years and don't make that kind of dough. Of course you have to take into account the cost of living for my state, and the fact that workers here earn about 75-80% of the national average.
Only if you are willing to spend more than half your yearly income on a car.
16k a year for the top end model. That's only around 1/3rd of your income if you make the median income of the US (~51k). And having the median income puts you far, far away from the top 1%.
When talking fractions of yearly income do you count gross or net pay? I would never spend 1/3 of my net income on a car, unless I could pay cash.
Totally true. They confabulate genius with autistic savant, they misrepresent what genius (or autistic savants) can do, and generally have no idea how "normal" people react.
The basic problem is that the writers are not smart, let alone geniuses, so they simply do not know enough to write a show about geniuses.
I say the same thing about The Big Bang Theory. Not everyone with a high IQ is socially awkward or OCD. For better or worse, the show is written to appeal to its intended audience. Hackers, The Matrix, and Jurassic Park took liberties to try and show "normals" how the world appears to hackers.
I'll start being pro-life when the pro-life folk stop being anti-contraception.
I'm all for preventing conception (the pill, condoms, surgeries, etc), but firmly believe that once fertilization takes place the zygote should be protected in most cases (one obvious exception is a pregnancy resulting from rape). Only subgroups in the pro-life camp (such as the Catholic Church) speak out against contraception. Even though I use contraceptives myself, I believe that students be taught that abstinence is the only contraceptive method which is 100% effective all the time. Teach the risks of each method (for example, a small number of condoms tear) so students can make an informed decision. Don't use scare tactics or guilt trips.
Have they been using the identity of real people to catch pervs? While I want the pervs off the streets, I'm not ok with them using someone's identity without that person's explicit permission.
I thought people around here generally thought the concept of prosecuting for thoughtcrimes was disgusting? And yet here you are, saying that "all those pervo scumbags should be locked up forever!" How about we lock up the ones who actually do something (child molesters), and leave the ones who can't help that they have disfunctional sexual attractions but never act on them (pedophiles) alone, or at worst make them attend mandatory counciling (PedophilesAnonymous perhaps?)? Pedophilia does not mean child molester.
You are putting words into my mouth. I have often said that being tempted isn't a sin, but acting upon the temptation is. Police set up fake profiles in places where they meet scumbags. Those scumbags who solicit sex and go to the house (eg. those who act on their temptations) are the ones who are caught and taken off the streets. We only know that a person has these attractions because they've done or said something to tip it.