The problem is lack of regulation. Let the "free market" do whatever it wants and people will fuck it up. It could be malice or it could be incompetence, either way, oversight is needed.
I know right? And what about that sensationalist headline: "Breaking Physics News"??? If they had actually broken physics, I probably would have heard it on the news...
My suggestion is to sabotage their filtering. Everyone should put key words and phrases like "Free Tibet" on every page on every site, regardless of the content. Then nothing will get through! That'll show'em...
Wow, I rarely get to see so many strawman arguments in one post.
Anyway, this does raise an interesting question: is it ok to use such sensationalism even though it's based on good science? It seems to be the only way to get people to listen.
Up till now it has been sufficient for the Bushies to cry National Security and the Democrats would run frightened to hide. Now they have accidentally called the Administration's bluff they have discovered the consequences of standing up to Bully Bush - absolutely nothing.
I think you're wrong, something quite significant has come out of this: Bush has proved himself wrong. The gov't has been, and still is, saying that without this warrantless wiretapping, we are no longer safe. By calling their bluff, they forced Bush to say that he would veto the bill if it didn't include telecom immunity. In effect, and in his on words, he has put the well-being of the telcos over the safety of the American public! If this wiretapping is so instrumental to our safety, why would he threaten a veto, or in this case, let the legislation expire?
Yes, alternative news sites like Democracy Now! and Alternet are clearly on the liberal side. But so what? I'm not suggesting that these should be your only source of news, but you'll discover things (important things) from them that you would never EVER hear from the mainstream media.
Do yourself a favor and check them out once in a while. I particularly like Alternet, as they are more of an aggregator of independent media.
Hillary has been going on and on about the number of times Obama did not vote when he was in the Illinois Senate. Hopefully he'll use this as ammunition.
There is nothing in the constitution to prevent states from forming a pact to cast their electoral college votes for the candidate with the most votes nationwide.
To get rid of the EC would require a constitutional amendment.
But why should we trust you? When reviewing a game, we expect you to be impartial. But when the game's publisher/creator is paying you to review it, there is a clear conflict of interest.
Slashdot Mirror
Correction: Alphabet Soup Nazi.
It was a 1% for 1 year. That's about 6 years...
The problem is lack of regulation. Let the "free market" do whatever it wants and people will fuck it up. It could be malice or it could be incompetence, either way, oversight is needed.
Thank God?? I think we should thank Satan for this one...
In my experience, women tend to be disappointed if it blows up in your pants.
But who will edit the editors' editors?
I prefer organic calamari, thank you.
Are you sure you're not thinking of flight times?
I know right? And what about that sensationalist headline: "Breaking Physics News"??? If they had actually broken physics, I probably would have heard it on the news...
Damnit, why didn't you guys try this hard to keep Celine Dion, too?
Oh, wait, I know why...
Yeah, I learned this the hard way. Just make sure the food is enclosed in metal containers so the hamsters can't get to it.
My suggestion is to sabotage their filtering. Everyone should put key words and phrases like "Free Tibet" on every page on every site, regardless of the content. Then nothing will get through! That'll show'em...
Or the contact info of someone you don't like.
Can the FCC fine Comcast? I look forward to them passing down the losses to me. :(
Hmm, Macgyver must have tipped them off.
Hopefully this will lead to more corn in our diets!
/sarcasm
Wow, I rarely get to see so many strawman arguments in one post.
Anyway, this does raise an interesting question: is it ok to use such sensationalism even though it's based on good science? It seems to be the only way to get people to listen.
I think you're wrong, something quite significant has come out of this: Bush has proved himself wrong. The gov't has been, and still is, saying that without this warrantless wiretapping, we are no longer safe. By calling their bluff, they forced Bush to say that he would veto the bill if it didn't include telecom immunity. In effect, and in his on words, he has put the well-being of the telcos over the safety of the American public! If this wiretapping is so instrumental to our safety, why would he threaten a veto, or in this case, let the legislation expire?
Yes, alternative news sites like Democracy Now! and Alternet are clearly on the liberal side. But so what? I'm not suggesting that these should be your only source of news, but you'll discover things (important things) from them that you would never EVER hear from the mainstream media.
Do yourself a favor and check them out once in a while. I particularly like Alternet, as they are more of an aggregator of independent media.
I cringe every time I hear people say that. As much as I don't like Hillary, I'll still take her over any Republican.
Wait...that caused me to cringe, too.
*hopes for Obama nomination*
Hillary has been going on and on about the number of times Obama did not vote when he was in the Illinois Senate. Hopefully he'll use this as ammunition.
Hmm, I'm envisioning a movie combining Planet of the Apes and The Terminator. *shivers*
You're right on both counts. And the effort to circumvent the Electoral College is already underway: National Popular Vote Interstate Compact
No, sometimes they're closer.
Pfft, the image in that link was definitely photoshopped.
But why should we trust you? When reviewing a game, we expect you to be impartial. But when the game's publisher/creator is paying you to review it, there is a clear conflict of interest.