Exactly. But it has long been known that expert + reference > expert or reference. How many of us use references everyday? I've reached the age where learning anything new requires that I forget a commensurate about of information, so I use references everyday. On my desk this morning: SAMBA Essentials for Windows Administrators
RedHat 8 Linux Bible
Programming Python
And Heaven knows how much info I will Google today...
You're right. I just used the wrong words. I should have said that the source code should be open for inspection so that we can be sure that it's safe. We probably should know how the system delivers the votes to the central tabulator too. Just watched Hacking Democracy ( http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/hackingdemocracy/ ) last night and it scared the crap out of me.
Please try to read John Stuart Mill's treatise, On Liberty. Mill discusses a danger to democracy he refers to as "the tyranny of the majority." This is one of the strongest arguments for a Republic that has intrinsic rights at its core.
Since I had two cell phones (one for work and one for personal use) they were pretty convinced I was one of them, even though I listed off the names in the address book but couldn't tell them the number for my work phone (hell I never call it
I have a relative who owns a lucrative business selling equipment to police departments. My favorite quote of his: "...nobody ever said that cops were smart."
We support a lot of networks for non-profit organizations. We usually go through techsoup for licensing and software. Microsoft always makes their stuff available, whereas companies like Intuit and Macromedia are usually out of stock. Too be fair Symantec usually has stuff available. And look at these MS prices:
Nancy P. is going to be scary. I really think that she will be all about blame, and she will try (and fail) to bring international troops into Iraq. I expect she will demand the Defense Secs resign, and the President will say no, and then the battle between Congress and the President will begin....with the witch hunts and blame game.
What I think will happen will be business as usual. Nancy Pelosi will abandon her liberal idealoge base and begin courting the middle. Just like GWB did with the conservatives. And the Democrats in power will push government contracts to their firends, just like the Republicans did.
In the end, it's all about doing business. The donors and the lobbyists will continue to write our laws and politicians will continue to see staying in power as their main objective. To paraphrase John McCain, people don't change Washington; Washington changes people. That is all.
Another consideration is that you will probably make some good contacts. It's always a good thing to enter an industry knowing other people in the field.
Not that I don't get the intended sarcasm, but what I'm saying is that you're being a little insulting and I am implying that your maybe it's due to excessive caffeine intake.
When it came to fire, these people didn't just say "You know, we don't understand it, nevermind[sic]", they tested combusion[sic], and discovered some of the most important elements of modern chemistry by doing so.
I never said "never mind" either. In fact, my brother is an ornithologist, and I regularly volunteer time with his organization helping with capture-recapture population studies in Mexico, Costa Rica, Oregon and Washington. But way to get up on your soapbox.
To live in this world and say "due to factors that we don't always understand" so nonchalantly is ridiculous. If we don't know, it is our duty as the descendants of the people who made our way of life possible to find out. Ignoring it because you don't know is a disgrace to your forefathers.
When I stated that "animal populations often rise and fall due to factors that we don't always understand," I was stating a simple fact. We *do not* always understand why populations rise and fall in every case (example: http://www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife/bewick.asp ). But somehow, from that simple statement, you infer that I'm being "ridiculous" and disgracing my "forefathers." Given that I am not a biologist or zoologist, I don't feel that it's my *responsibility* to do research on animals. Given that I am not a microbiologist or physician, I don't feel that it's my *responsibility* to do research on disease. I do my part by paying taxes and donating money to fund the research.
So, unless you have authored some animal population studies and have cured some diseases, please come down from your high horse and give us all a break from your morally-superior tone.
And where do "experts" come from? From years of moving up from more junior levels. That's one of the arguments I have about doing so much outsourcing. I've heard the argument that "We're only outsourcing the low-skill positions". Yes, but where will the next generation of experts come from if you lay waste to the training grounds that breed them? Farmers have an expression: "Eating your seed corn."
Dead on correct. There is nothing more pathetic than employers whining about the lack of "talent," when they have done absolutely nothing to develop "talent."
FTA: Many Americans believe that our political system is broken, and that money is to blame. Legislators are beholden to donations from special interest groups. Regulators pass through a revolving door to take jobs in the very industries they used to regulate. Big campaign donors somehow land big government contracts, despite arcane public bidding processes.
This is exactly the problem. I wonder if this will help though. Beware the media/government/corporate complex and interlocking directorships.
1. I disagree. As a society, we tell people all of the time how they can live their lives (drug laws, driver's licenses, etc). We also tell people what they can do with their body (suicide is illegal for instance). But don't get me wrong, I'm not an anti-abortion activist. We were merely talking about voting. Last I checked, I think that I was still free to vote the way I see best.
2. It really depends on how you define person, doesn't it? Probably to your standards, no I can't.
3. Practicing a religion and getting on a soapbox are two different things. For instance, if I choose to pray in public, that's still legal. I agree that I do not have the right to "torment other" with my beliefs, nor would I dream of doing so.
So while voting to save American fetuses you turn a blind eye to voting to unnecessarily kill or indirectly cause the death of potentially hundreds of thousands of adult human beings in other countries, including thousands of US soldiers for no good reason?
I'm sorry, I think that you're making some assumptions--and based upon what? Do you know me?
Look, like I indicated before, I'm not interested in arguing or debating abortion. I have my beliefs and I'm not expecting you to agree with them. I respect that you have your point-of-view; if you could reciprocate, it would be appreciated.
I'm going to try to keep this polite because I'm as tired of hearing the rhetoric on each side as you probably are. I also am going to only speak for myself, not the pro-life movement as a whole.
I don't understand two things. When do you get the right to tell me what to do with my body? When do I get the right to tell another woman what to do with their body?
For me it's not that I *want* to tell you what to do with your body, it's that I believe that a fetus is a real person, with the same right to existence as any human. This is just my opinion. I assume that you do not see it that way and I respect your opinion. If what I believe were true, I think that you could see why it's isn't just a matter of your rights. But, like I said, I assume that you do not see it that way.
Go practice your religion in private and leave me out of it.
Given the way that many religious people have shown disrespect for others of differing viewpoints, I understand your reaction, but I also would hope that you could see that I have a right to practice my religion in public. I only ask you to be tolerant of it--not to agree to it, enjoy it or pay for it.
Give them a hardcore left liberal, but who happened to be pro-life, and neutral/quiet on gay issues, and you'd have a viable candidate for the nation's republicans. IT IS the only reason many people vote republican.
How true. Abortion is a powerful and polarizing issue.
Abortion is the biggie because many of us cannot in good conscience vote for "pro-choice" candidates, although we might be in favor of the more compassionate liberal agenda as it pertains to social programs and civil rights. This leaves us with a no-win situation and we just end up choosing the lesser of evils, which is often a "pro-life" candidate.
The reason those women voted for Bush is because their church told them they should.
That's a little condescending don't you think? While some people *do* march in lockstep, many of us have wrestled mightily with this issue and come to our own conclusion through our own reasoning processes. After all, if people unflinchingly did what their churches told them to, then we would see churches with a lot more money ( http://www.adherents.com/misc/giving.html ). Although many of us are coming from a religious perspective, there are also secular "pro-lifers" ( http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html ) as well.
In the late 70s it was a relative rarity to see Canada Geese in our area. Now they live in every 4'x4' piece of grass available. You can't even walk in a park without stepping in goose crap. Most people around here refer to them as "rats with wings." One company in a local industrial park has a guy on staff who uses two Border Collies to chase the geese away.
This is also true of deer and coyotes in our area. Animal populations often rise and fall due to factors that we don't always understand.
How come this doesn't hold good when employees steal money from their bosses?
This reminds me of when I worked for a Fortune 500 company some years back. The manager of my location *routinely* shaved time off of employee time cards in order to make his wage budget. But this guy would routinely have thieving employees arrested AND would manage to work up a big load of righteous indignation.
Weeeell, we can prove to you that it's true if you just give us your mom's visa number & expiration date. Oh, BTW, don't forget that little number on the back of the card!
I think that this is an excellent idea--at least from a consumer's standpoint. I would *love* to be able to get the whole season of shows like Entourage, The Wire, and The Sopranos before they hit the TV screen. As it is, I am suffering from Sunday to Sunday waiting to see what is going to happen on The Wire, which isn't very convenient for me as a consumer. I think that I would actually watch more shows if I didn't have to be tortured.
Slashdot Mirror
Exactly. But it has long been known that expert + reference > expert or reference. How many of us use references everyday? I've reached the age where learning anything new requires that I forget a commensurate about of information, so I use references everyday. On my desk this morning:
SAMBA Essentials for Windows Administrators
RedHat 8 Linux Bible
Programming Python
And Heaven knows how much info I will Google today...
You're right. I just used the wrong words. I should have said that the source code should be open for inspection so that we can be sure that it's safe. We probably should know how the system delivers the votes to the central tabulator too. Just watched Hacking Democracy ( http://www.hbo.com/docs/programs/hackingdemocracy/ ) last night and it scared the crap out of me.
#2. The corporate/government desktop market. Pay attention to how Munich progresses. This is the next big market for Linux.
You would think that government would be the first to jump on open source. Very few things seem as ridiculous to me as closed-source voting machines.
But then again, since money elects politicians, politicians cozy up to big business.
Please try to read John Stuart Mill's treatise, On Liberty. Mill discusses a danger to democracy he refers to as "the tyranny of the majority." This is one of the strongest arguments for a Republic that has intrinsic rights at its core.
Since I had two cell phones (one for work and one for personal use) they were pretty convinced I was one of them, even though I listed off the names in the address book but couldn't tell them the number for my work phone (hell I never call it
I have a relative who owns a lucrative business selling equipment to police departments. My favorite quote of his: "...nobody ever said that cops were smart."
We support a lot of networks for non-profit organizations. We usually go through techsoup for licensing and software. Microsoft always makes their stuff available, whereas companies like Intuit and Macromedia are usually out of stock. Too be fair Symantec usually has stuff available. And look at these MS prices:
g _name=TechSoupMain&category_name=Office+Tools+MS&P age=1&Cat1=Microsoft&CatCount=1 g _name=TechSoupMain&category_name=Servers+MS&Page=1 &Cat1=Microsoft&CatCount=1
http://www.techsoup.org/stock/category.asp?catalo
http://www.techsoup.org/stock/category.asp?catalo
Nancy P. is going to be scary. I really think that she will be all about blame, and she will try (and fail) to bring international troops into Iraq. I expect she will demand the Defense Secs resign, and the President will say no, and then the battle between Congress and the President will begin....with the witch hunts and blame game.
What I think will happen will be business as usual. Nancy Pelosi will abandon her liberal idealoge base and begin courting the middle. Just like GWB did with the conservatives. And the Democrats in power will push government contracts to their firends, just like the Republicans did.
In the end, it's all about doing business. The donors and the lobbyists will continue to write our laws and politicians will continue to see staying in power as their main objective. To paraphrase John McCain, people don't change Washington; Washington changes people. That is all.
Another consideration is that you will probably make some good contacts. It's always a good thing to enter an industry knowing other people in the field.
Not that I don't get the intended sarcasm, but what I'm saying is that you're being a little insulting and I am implying that your maybe it's due to excessive caffeine intake.
When it came to fire, these people didn't just say "You know, we don't understand it, nevermind[sic]", they tested combusion[sic], and discovered some of the most important elements of modern chemistry by doing so.
I never said "never mind" either. In fact, my brother is an ornithologist, and I regularly volunteer time with his organization helping with capture-recapture population studies in Mexico, Costa Rica, Oregon and Washington. But way to get up on your soapbox.
To live in this world and say "due to factors that we don't always understand" so nonchalantly is ridiculous. If we don't know, it is our duty as the descendants of the people who made our way of life possible to find out. Ignoring it because you don't know is a disgrace to your forefathers.
When I stated that "animal populations often rise and fall due to factors that we don't always understand," I was stating a simple fact. We *do not* always understand why populations rise and fall in every case (example: http://www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife/bewick.asp ). But somehow, from that simple statement, you infer that I'm being "ridiculous" and disgracing my "forefathers." Given that I am not a biologist or zoologist, I don't feel that it's my *responsibility* to do research on animals. Given that I am not a microbiologist or physician, I don't feel that it's my *responsibility* to do research on disease. I do my part by paying taxes and donating money to fund the research.
So, unless you have authored some animal population studies and have cured some diseases, please come down from your high horse and give us all a break from your morally-superior tone.
And where do "experts" come from? From years of moving up from more junior levels. That's one of the arguments I have about doing so much outsourcing. I've heard the argument that "We're only outsourcing the low-skill positions". Yes, but where will the next generation of experts come from if you lay waste to the training grounds that breed them? Farmers have an expression: "Eating your seed corn."
Dead on correct. There is nothing more pathetic than employers whining about the lack of "talent," when they have done absolutely nothing to develop "talent."
Perfect example: http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm
Lord forbid that someone steals your "government-supplied certificate," or you could be doing some serious time in a Brazilian prison.
FTA: Many Americans believe that our political system is broken, and that money is to blame. Legislators are beholden to donations from special interest groups. Regulators pass through a revolving door to take jobs in the very industries they used to regulate. Big campaign donors somehow land big government contracts, despite arcane public bidding processes.
This is exactly the problem. I wonder if this will help though. Beware the media/government/corporate complex and interlocking directorships.
1. I disagree. As a society, we tell people all of the time how they can live their lives (drug laws, driver's licenses, etc). We also tell people what they can do with their body (suicide is illegal for instance). But don't get me wrong, I'm not an anti-abortion activist. We were merely talking about voting. Last I checked, I think that I was still free to vote the way I see best.
2. It really depends on how you define person, doesn't it? Probably to your standards, no I can't.
3. Practicing a religion and getting on a soapbox are two different things. For instance, if I choose to pray in public, that's still legal. I agree that I do not have the right to "torment other" with my beliefs, nor would I dream of doing so.
So while voting to save American fetuses you turn a blind eye to voting to unnecessarily kill or indirectly cause the death of potentially hundreds of thousands of adult human beings in other countries, including thousands of US soldiers for no good reason?
I'm sorry, I think that you're making some assumptions--and based upon what? Do you know me?
Look, like I indicated before, I'm not interested in arguing or debating abortion. I have my beliefs and I'm not expecting you to agree with them. I respect that you have your point-of-view; if you could reciprocate, it would be appreciated.
Yeah, maybe switch to decaf.
So true. But I think that's covered in "agree to it." Never can be too careful though.
I'm going to try to keep this polite because I'm as tired of hearing the rhetoric on each side as you probably are. I also am going to only speak for myself, not the pro-life movement as a whole.
I don't understand two things. When do you get the right to tell me what to do with my body? When do I get the right to tell another woman what to do with their body?
For me it's not that I *want* to tell you what to do with your body, it's that I believe that a fetus is a real person, with the same right to existence as any human. This is just my opinion. I assume that you do not see it that way and I respect your opinion. If what I believe were true, I think that you could see why it's isn't just a matter of your rights. But, like I said, I assume that you do not see it that way.
Go practice your religion in private and leave me out of it.
Given the way that many religious people have shown disrespect for others of differing viewpoints, I understand your reaction, but I also would hope that you could see that I have a right to practice my religion in public. I only ask you to be tolerant of it--not to agree to it, enjoy it or pay for it.
Give them a hardcore left liberal, but who happened to be pro-life, and neutral/quiet on gay issues, and you'd have a viable candidate for the nation's republicans. IT IS the only reason many people vote republican.
How true. Abortion is a powerful and polarizing issue.
Abortion is the biggie because many of us cannot in good conscience vote for "pro-choice" candidates, although we might be in favor of the more compassionate liberal agenda as it pertains to social programs and civil rights. This leaves us with a no-win situation and we just end up choosing the lesser of evils, which is often a "pro-life" candidate.
The reason those women voted for Bush is because their church told them they should.
That's a little condescending don't you think? While some people *do* march in lockstep, many of us have wrestled mightily with this issue and come to our own conclusion through our own reasoning processes. After all, if people unflinchingly did what their churches told them to, then we would see churches with a lot more money ( http://www.adherents.com/misc/giving.html ). Although many of us are coming from a religious perspective, there are also secular "pro-lifers" ( http://www.godlessprolifers.org/home.html ) as well.
In the late 70s it was a relative rarity to see Canada Geese in our area. Now they live in every 4'x4' piece of grass available. You can't even walk in a park without stepping in goose crap. Most people around here refer to them as "rats with wings." One company in a local industrial park has a guy on staff who uses two Border Collies to chase the geese away.
This is also true of deer and coyotes in our area. Animal populations often rise and fall due to factors that we don't always understand.
Where's my flying car?
How come this doesn't hold good when employees steal money from their bosses?
This reminds me of when I worked for a Fortune 500 company some years back. The manager of my location *routinely* shaved time off of employee time cards in order to make his wage budget. But this guy would routinely have thieving employees arrested AND would manage to work up a big load of righteous indignation.
Weeeell, we can prove to you that it's true if you just give us your mom's visa number & expiration date. Oh, BTW, don't forget that little number on the back of the card!
I think that this is an excellent idea--at least from a consumer's standpoint. I would *love* to be able to get the whole season of shows like Entourage, The Wire, and The Sopranos before they hit the TV screen. As it is, I am suffering from Sunday to Sunday waiting to see what is going to happen on The Wire, which isn't very convenient for me as a consumer. I think that I would actually watch more shows if I didn't have to be tortured.
Yeah obviously. http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pron