The "Another One Rides the Bus" track Dr D. always played was a recording of the live performance of it Wierd Al did on his radio show way back in the KMET days.
TheSoundLA (100.3 FM) did a KMET retrospective last July, which they called "Finally a KMET Friday" or something. Dr. Demento got an hour live on it. He played, of course, that same recording of "Another One Rides the Bus" and most of the other faves like "FishHeads" and "They're Coming To Take Me Away."
So if I read this correctly, the point of this article is we should get a time machine so we can go back to the 70's and impress people with our smartphones?
It's already happened. How do you think we got the tech in the first place?
All the information in one place makes it easy to abuse.
All the information in one place also makes it easier for me to use, no matter where I am or what device I have. So there.
If you do a search you can easily find tales of IRS agents abusing their authority to look up info on celebrities, political candidates, and even their ex-wives.
I do it, too. You can as well. You don't need an IRS agent's authority, either. That info is already out there, whether you're on FB or Google or not, and it's way more personal than anything Google collects.
I am even more Machiavellian than either one
on
Privacy Machiavellis
·
· Score: 0
Because I use both, and do not care if I am tracked or targeted. Nor do I feel that being tracked and targeted is a serious violation of my privacy. So there.
Not once do they acknowledge that (a) this is an unprecedented engineering failure,
Because it's not. Most major engineering failures in the past have proceeded exactly as this one has: one small safety feature at a time is left unrepaired, untested or uninspected. Not one single failure can be fingered as the ultimate cause, because lots of little failures and oversights were necessary to create the conditions for a major failure of multiple systems all at once. We've seen this many, many times before. It is not at all unprecedented.
(b) there were multiple safeguards,
Which were allowed to fall into disrepair one at a time, until there were no effective safeguards.
(c) it's an economic necessity that we drill for oil,
True, but this has nothing to do with BP's failure to maintain the safety gear.
(d) Murphy's law -- no matter how hard you try, eventually mistakes will be made.
Murphy's law is not a free pass to evade liability for your mistakes and failures.
BP is doing everything possible to fix the problem, while we sit on the sidelines and debate their ineffectiveness.
Their ineffectiveness is readily apparent, and does not need to be debated. That they have done everything possible is questionable. Since BP haven't allowed 3rd parties on site to conduct an independent evaluation of the disaster, we have only their word to go on.
I don't think that's really fair -- if we get into a car accident, we're quick to shrug it off as just that: an accident. Nobody's fault. We pick up the pieces and move on.
Um, no we don't. We purchase insurance to protect our assets in case we are found liable for damages. If there is a dispute about liability, we go to court. Money changes hands, and victims are made whole to the extent the law allows. We don't shrug it off at all. What planet are you from? Not this one, apparently.
But when it's a large corporation, we somehow think they should be held to a higher standard? No, I don't think they should.
The leaking well in the Gulf is a far, far larger accident than a car crash. They should be held to a higher standard because their accident has caused much larger damage to a much larger number of people than a car collision. In fact, this looks like it may become the largest industrial accident of all time. Of course they should be held to a higher standard. Individuals are not capable of causing damage with such immense extent as this.
Yeah, that's why that San Francisco school sent home the students for wearing American Flags on Cinco De Mayo.
One vice principal sent students home under an interpretation of district policy which the district later said was mistaken, and no further action was taken against the students. It was only made a political issue by pollyannas like Glenn Beck, and you fell for it.
What you have here is a buncha people who are independent and are tired of government encroaching on civil liberty and forcing "help" on us.
But you're not independent. This fantasy is the source of your confusion.
For the most part we believe in personal responsibility and feel that you should reap the benefits of your work as well as the consequences for your actions.
But the people you elect to office don't actually believe that. They just use you because you're so ready to believe it.
Why that figure and not another? What programs will have to be cut to do this? What effect will those cuts have, and are they worth the cost?
75% would be better.
Why? Why not 80% or 70%?
Require a balanced budget period.
Why? Seems like a surplus would have been a good thing to have when the great recession came upon us.
Require all three branches of government to follow the laws they swore to uphold...
How? By passing a law requiring them to follow the laws already passed? What if they ignore the new law requiring them to follow the old laws?...allow charges of treason if they don't.
Treason is defined in the constitution, and what you're ranting about isn't it. So you want to ignore the constitution in order to enforce it.
Immediately throw out all federal laws that are not constitutionally supported...
And how do you determine that? Are you seeking a really really really activist judiciary? Because courts cannot just issue rulings. Somebody with standing must bring a case before a court can thrown out a law.
Please feel free now to tell me where those issues contradict each other, and where I am being 'vague'.
Does going to a rally make you a 'tea partier', or do the values make you a 'tea partier'.
Expressing vague anger over lots of issues you can't really explain, while espousing positions on these issue that contradict each other, that's what makes you a Tea Partier.
From TFA: "No company -- no matter how big or how creative -- should dictate what you can create, how you create it, or what you can experience on the web," they wrote.
So Adobe thinks people should be able to watch video without being forced to use Flash.
I thought it didn't need to be explained, but in case I was wrong: I am referring solely to audio formats as used by end-users who listen to audio files directly, either on their computer or on other hardware.
I was responding to this:
Not having to pontificate about audio formats that hardly anyone actually uses? Hell, that's just icing on the cake.
A whole lot of people who just listen to music files, listen to AAC, because they bought their music from iTMS. "Hardly anyone uses AAC" is just wrong, even when consideing only just-listen-to-music users.
Sounds like you are the one with a chip on your shoulder about a file format.
Slashdot Mirror
The "Another One Rides the Bus" track Dr D. always played was a recording of the live performance of it Wierd Al did on his radio show way back in the KMET days.
TheSoundLA (100.3 FM) did a KMET retrospective last July, which they called "Finally a KMET Friday" or something. Dr. Demento got an hour live on it. He played, of course, that same recording of "Another One Rides the Bus" and most of the other faves like "FishHeads" and "They're Coming To Take Me Away."
Here: They have it archived.
If this does pass I think it would be quickly repealed over the loud howling noises as people realize it passes.
Are you seriously suggesting that government might respond to, let alone take note of, public outrage?
So if I read this correctly, the point of this article is we should get a time machine so we can go back to the 70's and impress people with our smartphones?
It's already happened. How do you think we got the tech in the first place?
So, it appears you're one of the people the article is talking about.
Instead, the role of Case will be played by Ben Affleck. Whoah!
That's what hating on Keanu gets you.
All the information in one place makes it easy to abuse.
All the information in one place also makes it easier for me to use, no matter where I am or what device I have. So there.
If you do a search you can easily find tales of IRS agents abusing their authority to look up info on celebrities, political candidates, and even their ex-wives.
I do it, too. You can as well. You don't need an IRS agent's authority, either. That info is already out there, whether you're on FB or Google or not, and it's way more personal than anything Google collects.
Because I use both, and do not care if I am tracked or targeted. Nor do I feel that being tracked and targeted is a serious violation of my privacy. So there.
It appears to be an inside joke for series-watchers. Apparently there was an episode or two involving a hatch buried in the ground.
Secrets from the Hatch
Not once do they acknowledge that (a) this is an unprecedented engineering failure,
Because it's not. Most major engineering failures in the past have proceeded exactly as this one has: one small safety feature at a time is left unrepaired, untested or uninspected. Not one single failure can be fingered as the ultimate cause, because lots of little failures and oversights were necessary to create the conditions for a major failure of multiple systems all at once. We've seen this many, many times before. It is not at all unprecedented.
(b) there were multiple safeguards,
Which were allowed to fall into disrepair one at a time, until there were no effective safeguards.
(c) it's an economic necessity that we drill for oil,
True, but this has nothing to do with BP's failure to maintain the safety gear.
(d) Murphy's law -- no matter how hard you try, eventually mistakes will be made.
Murphy's law is not a free pass to evade liability for your mistakes and failures.
BP is doing everything possible to fix the problem, while we sit on the sidelines and debate their ineffectiveness.
Their ineffectiveness is readily apparent, and does not need to be debated. That they have done everything possible is questionable. Since BP haven't allowed 3rd parties on site to conduct an independent evaluation of the disaster, we have only their word to go on.
I don't think that's really fair -- if we get into a car accident, we're quick to shrug it off as just that: an accident. Nobody's fault. We pick up the pieces and move on.
Um, no we don't. We purchase insurance to protect our assets in case we are found liable for damages. If there is a dispute about liability, we go to court. Money changes hands, and victims are made whole to the extent the law allows. We don't shrug it off at all. What planet are you from? Not this one, apparently.
But when it's a large corporation, we somehow think they should be held to a higher standard? No, I don't think they should.
The leaking well in the Gulf is a far, far larger accident than a car crash. They should be held to a higher standard because their accident has caused much larger damage to a much larger number of people than a car collision. In fact, this looks like it may become the largest industrial accident of all time. Of course they should be held to a higher standard. Individuals are not capable of causing damage with such immense extent as this.
This article submission is either from an idiot or a troll.
Both. The submitter is an idiot, and kdawson is a troll.
Yeah, that's why that San Francisco school sent home the students for wearing American Flags on Cinco De Mayo.
One vice principal sent students home under an interpretation of district policy which the district later said was mistaken, and no further action was taken against the students. It was only made a political issue by pollyannas like Glenn Beck, and you fell for it.
Get a grip.
What you have here is a buncha people who are independent and are tired of government encroaching on civil liberty and forcing "help" on us.
But you're not independent. This fantasy is the source of your confusion.
For the most part we believe in personal responsibility and feel that you should reap the benefits of your work as well as the consequences for your actions.
But the people you elect to office don't actually believe that. They just use you because you're so ready to believe it.
OK, so now it's time to earn your +2 Insightful: what is the reason?
What evidence do you have that Google was, other than Google's own statement?
If Google made no statement, would you assume they were not capturing payload, like you assume Skyhook isn't?
Double standard, dude.
Even though Skyhook does exactly the same thing Google is doing. But Skyhook created the location API licensed by Apple, so it's all OK.
Amidoinitrite?
Cut government spending by at least 50%.
Why that figure and not another? What programs will have to be cut to do this? What effect will those cuts have, and are they worth the cost?
75% would be better.
Why? Why not 80% or 70%?
Require a balanced budget period.
Why? Seems like a surplus would have been a good thing to have when the great recession came upon us.
Require all three branches of government to follow the laws they swore to uphold...
How? By passing a law requiring them to follow the laws already passed? What if they ignore the new law requiring them to follow the old laws? ...allow charges of treason if they don't.
Treason is defined in the constitution, and what you're ranting about isn't it. So you want to ignore the constitution in order to enforce it.
Immediately throw out all federal laws that are not constitutionally supported...
And how do you determine that? Are you seeking a really really really activist judiciary? Because courts cannot just issue rulings. Somebody with standing must bring a case before a court can thrown out a law.
Please feel free now to tell me where those issues contradict each other, and where I am being 'vague'.
Done and done.
Does going to a rally make you a 'tea partier', or do the values make you a 'tea partier'.
Expressing vague anger over lots of issues you can't really explain, while espousing positions on these issue that contradict each other, that's what makes you a Tea Partier.
From TFA: "No company -- no matter how big or how creative -- should dictate what you can create, how you create it, or what you can experience on the web," they wrote.
So Adobe thinks people should be able to watch video without being forced to use Flash.
So Do I.
Now I wonder what all the fuss is about.
So you just spontaneously showed up for a rally, unbidden?
But if you have never gone to a rally, in what way are you a Tea Partier?
And what will prevent that entity from doing the same thing?
The only thing that makes sense is not to put anything private in a public forum, and to regard Facebook as a public forum.
If people aren't doing that already, then no amount of software cleverness can help them.
John while James had had had had had had had had had had had a better effect on the teacher.
The word "data" pluralizes "datum." "Data are lush" correctly pluralizes the singular form of the sentence.
Now who sounds stupid?
I thought it didn't need to be explained, but in case I was wrong: I am referring solely to audio formats as used by end-users who listen to audio files directly, either on their computer or on other hardware.
I was responding to this:
Not having to pontificate about audio formats that hardly anyone actually uses? Hell, that's just icing on the cake.
A whole lot of people who just listen to music files, listen to AAC, because they bought their music from iTMS. "Hardly anyone uses AAC" is just wrong, even when consideing only just-listen-to-music users.
Sounds like you are the one with a chip on your shoulder about a file format.
Who said anything about killing off MP3?
Was the scheme to place DRM updates on the disc scuttled for some reason? Too consumer-friendly?