Of course you vote for a lizard. You wouldn't want the wrong lizard to get in, would you?
My point exactly. I don't want to elect lizard overlords at all, but if a nice, thoughtful, moderate human can't make it out of the primaries, then I have to pick the least smelly, least treacherous lizard. That doesn't sit well with me.
Well of course Zuckerberg wants to get into politics. It was signaled long ago, but became abundantly clear when he suddenly disavowed atheism (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/12/30/mark-zuckerberg-says-hes-no-longer-an-atheist-believes-religion-is-very-important/). You can't be serious about politics in the good ol' USA unless you're a devout religious something-or-other.
That may have indeed been a piece of the foundation for a later public service career. He's not ready yet, I think you need to wait at least a few months before you completely flip-flop on a significant belief, even in today's political climate.
Trump's going to nationalize the Silicon Valley companies.
But of course he might screw up and try to nationalize Silicon Graphics or Silicone Valley (the San Fernando Valley porn industry), then deny he ever did it, then threaten to sue anyone who calls him on it. I just hope that doesn't end in a massive wave of bankruptcies (for Silicon Valley, SGI is already dead and Silicone Valley will never die).
The gross accumulation of wealth is destabilizing.
It should be universally capped and indexed to inflation.
Start with the President via a Constitutional Amendment.
Something like $10 million ($20 for married couple so President and First Lady) should be more than sufficient.
So if I'm elected as a single parent you punish my kids by halving their immediate family's maximum wealth? What if there is no First Lady, or the president's spouse is male?
$10 million seems arbitrary, and low. I went to school with plenty of kids whose parents you've never heard of but have more than $10 mil to their names. And good luck passing that. I totally get where this is coming from, but it unrealistically idealistic. And how would you stop a would-be billionaire president from transferring most of his wealth to close family members with a wink and a nod? Me being a billionaire or me being merely rich and my sister being a billionaire would afford me the same contacts and lifestyle either way.
Isn't this a case of counting eggs before they hatch?
Does someone presume he is just going to be given a "significant" position in government? Where is he getting it from? Who is electing him? Obama and Soros? Are we to just accepting that we are returning to self-proclaimed monarchy and nobility?
CAPTCHA: royally
To your last question, yes, we're already seeing something like that. And though I think Zuxk is unlikely to accept an appointment, it is not beyond the realm of possibility. He is close with Peter Thiel, FB CEO Sheryl Sandberg has already shown a willingness to open a dialog with the Trump administration, and Zuck holds some anti-net neutrality positions and could have a lot to gain from major FCC changes. Big business interests are going to rule much more so than in recent times, so playing ball with Trump should make things easier for those who are already rich, and maybe win them concessions their competitors won't get.
That's not to say that Zuckerberg is that likely to take a government job, but it wouldn't be a nonsensical move for him and Trump is already tapping people like him.
Yet another person I will be very happy to vote against.
Therein lies the problem with modern American politics. Far too often we are stuck voting for the lesser of two evils, casting our ballots against someone rather than for anyone we truly believe will represent our best interests. I don't have an easy solution, but the problem is clear, and our system is screwed.
He's a college dropout who became a billionaire. I thought Red State America loved that? Or do you also have to be a racist?
You just tell them what they want to hear and they'll vote for you, whether you make any attempt at being sincere or not. When they are reminded of your past opposite positions, just deny that ever happened and make some half-assed attempt to play to their fears about something else. In short, lie. Seems to work pretty reliably these days. And you don't have to be a racist, but you absolutely shouldn't denounce racists either, because every white vote counts, even the evil ones.
So Facebook would let him run for government... but it's more important that he demonstrate to the government that he won't have any potential conflicts of interest (unless he runs for President, of course).
Why? We've elected billionaires before, and he still runs the company, no matter how many shareholders there are or what the board says. Is there any chance the board wouldn't give their approval?
Since he refuses to hire older workers, and practices age discrimination, why would older people vote for him?
He could be appointed to some position. Age discrimination is present within the government but works in reverse though. You pretty much have to be over 40 to receive an appointment, and being over 50 or 55 definitely increases your chances, but money helps even more, and he's got more than enough of that.
Aliens? Nope, this is just the deathstar being used to zap some celestial bodies.
Obviously wrong, since the Deathstar was destroyed a long time ago and required a huge crew of aliens. So it couldn't have been the Deathstar, and there would definitely have been aliens there if it were present and operational.
Slashdot: news for pathetic losers and science-haters.
You forgot: Anonymous Cowards who crap on everyone else's fun but won't show their faces when they grace us all with their glorious proclamations and failed attempts at ironic humor.
I just recently retired. When I was working, I didn't use an alarm. I got up and made it to work just fine without one. My job required me to be on top of my game, which meant getting adequate sleep which meant my body was good at getting me up on time. You don't get adequate sleep, you make bad decisions, and aren't able to focus, listen, or remember as well. Studies are clear on that. So, unless you've decided to just be a drone, having a little machine ordering your life is a recipe for unhappiness. Looking at your phone for emails first thing in the morning is so foolish, that I find it difficult to believe "most people" do it. Of course, I have no difficulty believing most people are stupid, so perhaps I need to reconsider. If there is some "critical" information you have to respond to, then you should have been called by an actual person. Otherwise, fuck 'em. I suppose that pretending that you're so important that you need to be constantly checking your phone or the world will disappear must fulfill the place in your psyche that should be filled by an actually challenging, fulfilling career. My sympathies, but you need to consider choosing a different path.
Sounds like a lousy job if you slept so shallowly that you sprung to attention at just the right time every single day without an alarm. My sympathies, but I love it when I sleep so soundly that I'm lost in a dream when the alarm tells me I should probably get up soon. My dad slept without an alarm for years. We thought it was weird, then we found out that he had sleep apnea, which tends to do that.
If you can get up at any time you deem necessary, like a cat, and do so consistently, your sleep is not restful. Or maybe you just go to be way too early and give yourself way to long of a window to get ready for work in the morning, but I don't have that many extra hours to spare every single day. Healthy, restful sleep is wonderful but it certainly does not work like clockwork.
Yes, they took a while, but this was justified by the fact that so very few vulnerable devices were actually being exploited. Along the same lines, the windows in my home are all very, very easy to smash with a hammer and climb through, but that doesn't happen much around here, so I'm not in a hurry to get SoCal-style bars installed over them, or replace them with Lexan because it is a little more resistant to hammer blows.
At the very least, the headline should had been "Samsung users".
The summery compares Samsung sales with Apple, not Android.
Both Apple and Samsung users think there are only two companies making smartphones. They see only 4 choices in the market: Galaxy S, Note, small iphone, and bigger iphone. Their loss is our gain, as Samsung continuing to be the most recognizable name in Android phones (and "the" iphone alternative) can only help keep prices down for equivalent or superior devices from other companies.
And in a year or two, you won't be able to buy a Samsung phone with a "headphone jack", either.
And in a year or two, there will still be numerous Android phones sold by companies not named Samsung. But that is an inconvenient truth for Apple fanboys who continually conflate Samsung's choices with the demise of Android.
Did you know the first Android phone was made by HTC? How, prey tell, did they copy Samsung? That's quite a feat!
I seem to remember a small company offering an Android phone targeted at developers around the same time, possibly first. But of course the Dream/G1 was the first commercially available Android phone, and it was great. There were also other smartphones before the iphone though, such as some by Nokia, Sony, Palm, and of course Blackberry. But I suppose they all copied Samsung, who copied Apple, just ask any Apple fanboy.
Slashdot Mirror
Of course you vote for a lizard. You wouldn't want the wrong lizard to get in, would you?
My point exactly. I don't want to elect lizard overlords at all, but if a nice, thoughtful, moderate human can't make it out of the primaries, then I have to pick the least smelly, least treacherous lizard. That doesn't sit well with me.
Well of course Zuckerberg wants to get into politics. It was signaled long ago, but became abundantly clear when he suddenly disavowed atheism (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/12/30/mark-zuckerberg-says-hes-no-longer-an-atheist-believes-religion-is-very-important/). You can't be serious about politics in the good ol' USA unless you're a devout religious something-or-other.
That may have indeed been a piece of the foundation for a later public service career. He's not ready yet, I think you need to wait at least a few months before you completely flip-flop on a significant belief, even in today's political climate.
Trump's going to nationalize the Silicon Valley companies.
But of course he might screw up and try to nationalize Silicon Graphics or Silicone Valley (the San Fernando Valley porn industry), then deny he ever did it, then threaten to sue anyone who calls him on it. I just hope that doesn't end in a massive wave of bankruptcies (for Silicon Valley, SGI is already dead and Silicone Valley will never die).
The gross accumulation of wealth is destabilizing. It should be universally capped and indexed to inflation. Start with the President via a Constitutional Amendment. Something like $10 million ($20 for married couple so President and First Lady) should be more than sufficient.
So if I'm elected as a single parent you punish my kids by halving their immediate family's maximum wealth? What if there is no First Lady, or the president's spouse is male?
$10 million seems arbitrary, and low. I went to school with plenty of kids whose parents you've never heard of but have more than $10 mil to their names. And good luck passing that. I totally get where this is coming from, but it unrealistically idealistic. And how would you stop a would-be billionaire president from transferring most of his wealth to close family members with a wink and a nod? Me being a billionaire or me being merely rich and my sister being a billionaire would afford me the same contacts and lifestyle either way.
Isn't this a case of counting eggs before they hatch?
Does someone presume he is just going to be given a "significant" position in government? Where is he getting it from? Who is electing him? Obama and Soros? Are we to just accepting that we are returning to self-proclaimed monarchy and nobility?
CAPTCHA: royally
To your last question, yes, we're already seeing something like that. And though I think Zuxk is unlikely to accept an appointment, it is not beyond the realm of possibility. He is close with Peter Thiel, FB CEO Sheryl Sandberg has already shown a willingness to open a dialog with the Trump administration, and Zuck holds some anti-net neutrality positions and could have a lot to gain from major FCC changes. Big business interests are going to rule much more so than in recent times, so playing ball with Trump should make things easier for those who are already rich, and maybe win them concessions their competitors won't get.
That's not to say that Zuckerberg is that likely to take a government job, but it wouldn't be a nonsensical move for him and Trump is already tapping people like him.
Yet another person I will be very happy to vote against.
Therein lies the problem with modern American politics. Far too often we are stuck voting for the lesser of two evils, casting our ballots against someone rather than for anyone we truly believe will represent our best interests. I don't have an easy solution, but the problem is clear, and our system is screwed.
He's a college dropout who became a billionaire. I thought Red State America loved that? Or do you also have to be a racist?
You just tell them what they want to hear and they'll vote for you, whether you make any attempt at being sincere or not. When they are reminded of your past opposite positions, just deny that ever happened and make some half-assed attempt to play to their fears about something else. In short, lie. Seems to work pretty reliably these days. And you don't have to be a racist, but you absolutely shouldn't denounce racists either, because every white vote counts, even the evil ones.
So Facebook would let him run for government... but it's more important that he demonstrate to the government that he won't have any potential conflicts of interest (unless he runs for President, of course).
Why? We've elected billionaires before, and he still runs the company, no matter how many shareholders there are or what the board says. Is there any chance the board wouldn't give their approval?
Since he refuses to hire older workers, and practices age discrimination, why would older people vote for him?
He could be appointed to some position. Age discrimination is present within the government but works in reverse though. You pretty much have to be over 40 to receive an appointment, and being over 50 or 55 definitely increases your chances, but money helps even more, and he's got more than enough of that.
Aliens? Nope, this is just the deathstar being used to zap some celestial bodies.
Obviously wrong, since the Deathstar was destroyed a long time ago and required a huge crew of aliens. So it couldn't have been the Deathstar, and there would definitely have been aliens there if it were present and operational.
What's your point?
episode 4 was surprisingly good in resurrecting the franchise, considering how appallingly bad episodes 2 and 3 were. :-)
No, 3 had its moments and a more appropriate, darker tone. 1 was stupid and cheezy, 2 was just horrible.
According to the paper, a few milliseconds.
Of course, Score:0 for the correct answer, Score:5 for the non-RTFA question.
It's an extragalactic Federal Reserve Bank. At least that's what Google tells me FRB stands for.
I hope their science is more advanced than that of our earthly Fed, or we and the rest of the Local Group are in for one hell of a financial ride.
There's nothing wrong with Bacon, though...
Except that eating 2 strips of bacon a day increases your odds of getting heart disease by 20%. All pork in moderation.
(To any aspiedants reading, it's true that the Earth is orbit around a sun-like star. But that's not what it means).
(No, Earth is not orbit).
Slashdot: news for pathetic losers and science-haters.
You forgot: Anonymous Cowards who crap on everyone else's fun but won't show their faces when they grace us all with their glorious proclamations and failed attempts at ironic humor.
"million yuan" = billion yuan.
"$8.8 billion (61 million yuan)" should be "$8.8 billion (61 billion yuan)"
Thank you. I don't knowa lot about international currencies, but I thought that looked wrong.
I just recently retired. When I was working, I didn't use an alarm. I got up and made it to work just fine without one. My job required me to be on top of my game, which meant getting adequate sleep which meant my body was good at getting me up on time. You don't get adequate sleep, you make bad decisions, and aren't able to focus, listen, or remember as well. Studies are clear on that. So, unless you've decided to just be a drone, having a little machine ordering your life is a recipe for unhappiness. Looking at your phone for emails first thing in the morning is so foolish, that I find it difficult to believe "most people" do it. Of course, I have no difficulty believing most people are stupid, so perhaps I need to reconsider. If there is some "critical" information you have to respond to, then you should have been called by an actual person. Otherwise, fuck 'em. I suppose that pretending that you're so important that you need to be constantly checking your phone or the world will disappear must fulfill the place in your psyche that should be filled by an actually challenging, fulfilling career. My sympathies, but you need to consider choosing a different path.
Sounds like a lousy job if you slept so shallowly that you sprung to attention at just the right time every single day without an alarm. My sympathies, but I love it when I sleep so soundly that I'm lost in a dream when the alarm tells me I should probably get up soon. My dad slept without an alarm for years. We thought it was weird, then we found out that he had sleep apnea, which tends to do that.
If you can get up at any time you deem necessary, like a cat, and do so consistently, your sleep is not restful. Or maybe you just go to be way too early and give yourself way to long of a window to get ready for work in the morning, but I don't have that many extra hours to spare every single day. Healthy, restful sleep is wonderful but it certainly does not work like clockwork.
"If you're like most people, you wake up to an alarm ringing on your smartphone. "
If you're like most people over 45 you wake up because of the horribly urgent pressure on your bladder. Several times a night.
That's not most people over 45, just people who don't manage their late night fluid intake, and guys with prostate problems. Better get that checked.
Yes, they took a while, but this was justified by the fact that so very few vulnerable devices were actually being exploited. Along the same lines, the windows in my home are all very, very easy to smash with a hammer and climb through, but that doesn't happen much around here, so I'm not in a hurry to get SoCal-style bars installed over them, or replace them with Lexan because it is a little more resistant to hammer blows.
At the very least, the headline should had been "Samsung users".
The summery compares Samsung sales with Apple, not Android.
Both Apple and Samsung users think there are only two companies making smartphones. They see only 4 choices in the market: Galaxy S, Note, small iphone, and bigger iphone. Their loss is our gain, as Samsung continuing to be the most recognizable name in Android phones (and "the" iphone alternative) can only help keep prices down for equivalent or superior devices from other companies.
And in a year or two, you won't be able to buy a Samsung phone with a "headphone jack", either.
And in a year or two, there will still be numerous Android phones sold by companies not named Samsung. But that is an inconvenient truth for Apple fanboys who continually conflate Samsung's choices with the demise of Android.
Did you know the first Android phone was made by HTC? How, prey tell, did they copy Samsung? That's quite a feat!
I seem to remember a small company offering an Android phone targeted at developers around the same time, possibly first. But of course the Dream/G1 was the first commercially available Android phone, and it was great. There were also other smartphones before the iphone though, such as some by Nokia, Sony, Palm, and of course Blackberry. But I suppose they all copied Samsung, who copied Apple, just ask any Apple fanboy.