The court's findings of fact and conclusions of law don't do much without some context. What is the actual evidence? What is the case even about? This just tells us how it ended.
I actually have no idea why you like "You're an idiot," which is far more puzzling than the likelihood that someone would miss the humor in what I wrote. You, sir, have confused me.
I see it as being targeted more for, and more useful to, people who normally dictate instead of typing: lawyers, doctors, etc. The problem is that part of the joy of dictation is that you don't have to do the formatting yourself. For instance, a lawyer can dictate a letter and let his secretary (whose time isn't billed out at hundreds of dollars an hour) type it, format it, and print it on the lawyer's letterhead. Speech recognition software can't do that, so its only advantage is the extent to which it is faster or more accurate than just typing. The number of people who type slowly or inaccurately enough to benefit from this software is going down every day, as the last generation to grow up without computers and typing classes in school nears retirement.
#1 - How many of them automatically integrate with Time Machine-like software on the local network? Time Machine is, I'd note, about a lot more than backups.
#2 - Yeah, adding Mail to the iPod Touch is pretty useless. Lack of that is the main reason I've held out on getting one.
#3 - Please indicate the source of your expertise on product pricing, and demonstrate why your pricing model is superior to Apple's.
#4 - It's not for you. Don't worry so much.
The real question here is why you have so much animosity toward Apple. Did you just find out that Steve Jobs is your real father, or something?
I'm okay with that, but only if we can later create urban legends about it. Paul Revere, and several others, did the ride. Israel Bissell made a ride to tell about an actual battle, not to warn about a coming one.
Refuse to sign any bill that was not read aloud in at least one chamber of Congress prior to being voted upon
Refuse to sign any treaty that a team of the nations best lawyers can't convince me does no harm to the law embodied in the Constitution
Work to get a constitutional amendment passed to make the Constitution the supreme law of the land, above treaties
Put an end to executive agreements with foreign powers; call them "unratified treaties" as they are and apologize to my foreign counterparts that I am morally compelled not to enter into agreements with them absent the advice and consent of the Senate
Work to undo the erosion of the powers of the states to govern themselves
Appoint judicially conservative judges, preferably those with even less political loyalty than I have
Focus economic efforts on having as small a federal budget as possible, balanced or otherwise, and on applying the minimum level of financial support to the states to make sure that they don't slack on the things that they have too little incentive to do on their own
Appoint a Cabinet consisting mostly of people who respect me but dislike me or at least disagree with me on something relevant to the positions I appoint them to
Throw out ineffective security measures; this may sound callous, but I'd rather lose a planeful of people once in a blue moon than flush money and constitutional rights down the toilet and lose the same number of planefuls of people; additionally, I would institute more effective security measures, such as discretionary searches instead of the random kind
There are others. That's just the first 100 days.;)
Seniority matters on committees more so than in Congress as a whole, but your point is well taken. However, if the Representative from Wyoming pushes a bill through committee that is going to do a lot more good for Wyoming than for any other state, he can't expect it to pass if he's the only one voting for it.
Our government is not broken because of the number of representatives per capita. It's broken for plenty of reasons, but that one isn't even on the list; at least not for me.
The point you're missing, not really relevant to this story, is that the criminal justice system forces choices on people that they may lack the capacity to make for themselves. Underage drinking laws serve the exact same purpose as age of consent laws: They protect people from choices they are not yet qualified to make for themselves. Whether this protection is necessary or whether the laws accomplish this protection are topics for debate, but the purpose of having these laws is not to make up for a weakness in the viewpoint they express.
On the actual topic, I (obviously) have absolutely no problem with rescinding scholarships on these grounds. It's the scholarship provider's choice, and since scholarships (from the perspective of the recipient) represent what amounts to free money, it's hard for me to entertain complaints from people who do things that jeopardize their scholarships. I was very careful about what I did and who saw me do it when I was in high school, because I knew that being seen doing the wrong things by the wrong people would have consequences, including consequences that could easily amount to not being able to afford a real education.
We can disagree all we want on whether taking away free money from someone because he posted pictures of himself drinking underage on the internet is a fair punishment for what he did. (I'd argue that it's not really a punishment at all, since nothing is being taken away from him to which he was entitled.) And if we both care enough, nothing stops us from setting up our own scholarship funds, pushing our own personal agendas by the grounds on which we rescind awarded scholarships. Just be warned that I'll have more applicants, because there will be a mandatory cowbell audition involved in the process.
As someone who plays guitar but has relatively short pinkies, I actually found that, once I stopped constantly tormenting anyone who played Guitar Hero for being a geek (read: when I started dating an addict), playing Guitar Hero forced me to use my pinkies more than playing guitar did, which in turn improved my actual guitar playing. Plus, it was fun to pick up the game and beat it on Expert when the addict who got me into it can't play on Hard. What is it that I enjoy so much about being better than people at their favorite hobbies?;)
That's probably fair to say, but the only entitlement that really exists in this scenario is the entitlement of the scholarship providers to make decisions as to who receives their scholarships. If they revoke a scholarship because, for instance, your kid posted a picture of himself drinking underage on Facebook for all the world to see, that's their choice. They will deal with the consequences of that choice. (Which are likely to include showing the people who donate the money that backs the scholarship that they care about the character of the people who get their money and giving the money to an equally meritorious applicant who happened to think about the consequences of his actions carefully enough to decide not to show off his lawbreaking activities.)
Oh, I won't be replaced. I already got out of the IT field. This is just a hobby for me now that I have a career that can't be outsourced, not even to another US state.:)
You, and several others, failed to actually read my entire comment. By the way, that's why you are stuck in jobs where you have no say in what tools you get to use: You don't finish even the simplest tasks.
I clearly stated that, even when you don't have a choice of language, knowing which language would be best for the task at hand will still make your code in the employer-mandated language better. I know that it was buried at the end of my insanely long comment, but I assure you that it would have been a worthwhile read had you made it to the end.
"Disagreeable" is a word of many meanings. Let's be more specific: If you break the law, there are consequences. If you take pride in having broken the law, there are additional consequences. Also, if you show your appreciation for people who are giving you free money to go to college by speaking negatively about them at every turn, you may end up forfeiting that free money. Why is this so difficult to deal with? Are we really such an entitlement society that our responsibility for our actions ends the minute someone says that one of the consequences will be forfeiture of the free money we feel entitled to?
Just a correction: The dinosaur mummy that was previously reported on Slashdot a couple weeks ago was found in North Dakota. I repeat my assurances that these two states are separate and that every article and TV program about that dinosaur that I was aware of got it right, except Slashdot.
All the coding jobs will be there. Many of the real problem-solving jobs will still be held by capable western problem solvers. That's why you want to be a good problem solver and a good tool selector. It's also why I recommend that everyone know at least one language which involves more thinking than typing - because the typing jobs will eventually all be done by eastern code monkeys, but the thinking jobs can be kept in the West.
Slashdot Mirror
The court's findings of fact and conclusions of law don't do much without some context. What is the actual evidence? What is the case even about? This just tells us how it ended.
It's also not a criminal case, as far as I can tell. The article was dumb, but the Slashdot version is dumber.
The article isn't much better. I think that it's going to be nothing but sensationalism unless someone gets ahold of the actual court documents.
I actually have no idea why you like "You're an idiot," which is far more puzzling than the likelihood that someone would miss the humor in what I wrote. You, sir, have confused me.
I see it as being targeted more for, and more useful to, people who normally dictate instead of typing: lawyers, doctors, etc. The problem is that part of the joy of dictation is that you don't have to do the formatting yourself. For instance, a lawyer can dictate a letter and let his secretary (whose time isn't billed out at hundreds of dollars an hour) type it, format it, and print it on the lawyer's letterhead. Speech recognition software can't do that, so its only advantage is the extent to which it is faster or more accurate than just typing. The number of people who type slowly or inaccurately enough to benefit from this software is going down every day, as the last generation to grow up without computers and typing classes in school nears retirement.
#1 - How many of them automatically integrate with Time Machine-like software on the local network? Time Machine is, I'd note, about a lot more than backups.
#2 - Yeah, adding Mail to the iPod Touch is pretty useless. Lack of that is the main reason I've held out on getting one.
#3 - Please indicate the source of your expertise on product pricing, and demonstrate why your pricing model is superior to Apple's.
#4 - It's not for you. Don't worry so much.
The real question here is why you have so much animosity toward Apple. Did you just find out that Steve Jobs is your real father, or something?
I'm okay with that, but only if we can later create urban legends about it. Paul Revere, and several others, did the ride. Israel Bissell made a ride to tell about an actual battle, not to warn about a coming one.
The phrase "your an idiot" is one of my favorites almost in the English language.
- Refuse to sign any bill that was not read aloud in at least one chamber of Congress prior to being voted upon
- Refuse to sign any treaty that a team of the nations best lawyers can't convince me does no harm to the law embodied in the Constitution
- Work to get a constitutional amendment passed to make the Constitution the supreme law of the land, above treaties
- Put an end to executive agreements with foreign powers; call them "unratified treaties" as they are and apologize to my foreign counterparts that I am morally compelled not to enter into agreements with them absent the advice and consent of the Senate
- Work to undo the erosion of the powers of the states to govern themselves
- Appoint judicially conservative judges, preferably those with even less political loyalty than I have
- Focus economic efforts on having as small a federal budget as possible, balanced or otherwise, and on applying the minimum level of financial support to the states to make sure that they don't slack on the things that they have too little incentive to do on their own
- Appoint a Cabinet consisting mostly of people who respect me but dislike me or at least disagree with me on something relevant to the positions I appoint them to
- Throw out ineffective security measures; this may sound callous, but I'd rather lose a planeful of people once in a blue moon than flush money and constitutional rights down the toilet and lose the same number of planefuls of people; additionally, I would institute more effective security measures, such as discretionary searches instead of the random kind
There are others. That's just the first 100 days.To steal a joke, we can now finally realize our real dream: A remake of the Wizard of Oz, starring Robin Williams. And no one else.
I guess we'll just have to do this the old-fashioned way. Now accepting (paper) applications for the next Paul Revere.
No, but you might feel stupid when you see how easy the answer would have been to find: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CV. :P
Seniority matters on committees more so than in Congress as a whole, but your point is well taken. However, if the Representative from Wyoming pushes a bill through committee that is going to do a lot more good for Wyoming than for any other state, he can't expect it to pass if he's the only one voting for it.
Our government is not broken because of the number of representatives per capita. It's broken for plenty of reasons, but that one isn't even on the list; at least not for me.
Yes, Wyoming's solitary Representative is really keeping California's contingent of 53 from getting any work done.
The point you're missing, not really relevant to this story, is that the criminal justice system forces choices on people that they may lack the capacity to make for themselves. Underage drinking laws serve the exact same purpose as age of consent laws: They protect people from choices they are not yet qualified to make for themselves. Whether this protection is necessary or whether the laws accomplish this protection are topics for debate, but the purpose of having these laws is not to make up for a weakness in the viewpoint they express.
On the actual topic, I (obviously) have absolutely no problem with rescinding scholarships on these grounds. It's the scholarship provider's choice, and since scholarships (from the perspective of the recipient) represent what amounts to free money, it's hard for me to entertain complaints from people who do things that jeopardize their scholarships. I was very careful about what I did and who saw me do it when I was in high school, because I knew that being seen doing the wrong things by the wrong people would have consequences, including consequences that could easily amount to not being able to afford a real education.
We can disagree all we want on whether taking away free money from someone because he posted pictures of himself drinking underage on the internet is a fair punishment for what he did. (I'd argue that it's not really a punishment at all, since nothing is being taken away from him to which he was entitled.) And if we both care enough, nothing stops us from setting up our own scholarship funds, pushing our own personal agendas by the grounds on which we rescind awarded scholarships. Just be warned that I'll have more applicants, because there will be a mandatory cowbell audition involved in the process.
As someone who plays guitar but has relatively short pinkies, I actually found that, once I stopped constantly tormenting anyone who played Guitar Hero for being a geek (read: when I started dating an addict), playing Guitar Hero forced me to use my pinkies more than playing guitar did, which in turn improved my actual guitar playing. Plus, it was fun to pick up the game and beat it on Expert when the addict who got me into it can't play on Hard. What is it that I enjoy so much about being better than people at their favorite hobbies? ;)
Did I miss the part where he said that they were just having a drink? "Highly illegal" makes it sound more like burglary or the like.
That's probably fair to say, but the only entitlement that really exists in this scenario is the entitlement of the scholarship providers to make decisions as to who receives their scholarships. If they revoke a scholarship because, for instance, your kid posted a picture of himself drinking underage on Facebook for all the world to see, that's their choice. They will deal with the consequences of that choice. (Which are likely to include showing the people who donate the money that backs the scholarship that they care about the character of the people who get their money and giving the money to an equally meritorious applicant who happened to think about the consequences of his actions carefully enough to decide not to show off his lawbreaking activities.)
Oh, I won't be replaced. I already got out of the IT field. This is just a hobby for me now that I have a career that can't be outsourced, not even to another US state. :)
You, and several others, failed to actually read my entire comment. By the way, that's why you are stuck in jobs where you have no say in what tools you get to use: You don't finish even the simplest tasks.
I clearly stated that, even when you don't have a choice of language, knowing which language would be best for the task at hand will still make your code in the employer-mandated language better. I know that it was buried at the end of my insanely long comment, but I assure you that it would have been a worthwhile read had you made it to the end.
"Disagreeable" is a word of many meanings. Let's be more specific: If you break the law, there are consequences. If you take pride in having broken the law, there are additional consequences. Also, if you show your appreciation for people who are giving you free money to go to college by speaking negatively about them at every turn, you may end up forfeiting that free money. Why is this so difficult to deal with? Are we really such an entitlement society that our responsibility for our actions ends the minute someone says that one of the consequences will be forfeiture of the free money we feel entitled to?
Without RTFA, I can't be certain, but perhaps the 2009 budget will be the first one to not be released in hard copy by the OMB at all.
Just a correction: The dinosaur mummy that was previously reported on Slashdot a couple weeks ago was found in North Dakota. I repeat my assurances that these two states are separate and that every article and TV program about that dinosaur that I was aware of got it right, except Slashdot.
All the coding jobs will be there. Many of the real problem-solving jobs will still be held by capable western problem solvers. That's why you want to be a good problem solver and a good tool selector. It's also why I recommend that everyone know at least one language which involves more thinking than typing - because the typing jobs will eventually all be done by eastern code monkeys, but the thinking jobs can be kept in the West.
My knowledge of Latin and Greek makes me a better English reader, writer, and speaker.