I understand what you're trying to say. Personally, I'd rather be a middle-class free man than a highly-paid slave, but that's just what's good for me. On the other hand, some people like the luxurious life even if they have no free time left outside of work to enjoy it. I'm not saying that's the kind of life that's for everyone, but if someone wants to do it, that's their decision. Why should the government try to stop them? You can't be free if the government is able to tell you how to live your life. Mostly, I just want the government to leave me alone and not play any role in my life at all.
A national tax would discourage such frivolous spending and encourage saving your money for retirement.
It's their money, they should be able to spend it as they see fit.
Furthermore, if you had to pay a huge national tax if you make above a certain amount (say $100k) where is the incentive to succeed if the system just punishes you for daring to strive for the lifestyle you want? In such a scenario You would be better off to earn less while paying less tax. Everyone loses.
What Gamestop is doing is hardly innovative; It's the college textbook business model. Buy it used, pay about 60-70% new price. (or worse) Sell it back at the end of the semester and you're lucky to recoup 40%. Back in my college days, I often did what I could to avoid buying textbooks because of rackets like that, but sometimes there was no other way.
If they do know that a hidden partition exists, it may be worth their computational resources to decrypt it, even if it requires brute force.
Brute force is absolutely pointless, since there is not enough computing power on the planet to break AES-256 in any reasonable amount of time as far as I know. (they could start it up and come back in a few million years to see how it's doing) It's far easier to waterboard the password out of you.
The problem with your argument is that you treat all denominations as the same.
If you want to talk about indulgences, that's more of a Catholic issue. Protestants do not believe in that doctrine; rather, they believe that once you accept Christ, all sins are forgiven (past present, and future) and no further payment is required.
Also, don't make the mistake of thinking that all evangelicals are like the ones that have been discredited. It's just that the press thrives on scandal and you very seldom hear about the good ones.
Try attending church regularly and never donating a cent. Watch how the other people treat you.
It's not like people are required to give regularly. (many people pay monthly or quarterly) People give under the pretense that God has blessed them and they want to give part of that back out of gratitude. Whether you choose to give or not is up to you, and you give what you feel you should give. It's not like you should feel like you're paying dues or have a mentality where you expect to get something back. Most churches only keep track of how much you give if you pay through check (and that's more of a service to you so you know what to declare on your taxes) You always have the option of donating cash if you want to give anonymously.
I'm wondering if they can find a way to process Kudzu into ethanol. It's made out of cellulose (basically sugar) like any other plant, and sugar can be converted into ethanol. The unique thing about kudzu is it's incredible growth rate...we always have plenty of it. Here in the southern US, the damn plant literally grows at least foot a day in the summer and requires extensive maintenance to keep in check. (you can start with bare soil and have a 20-foot vine coming out of it in no time at all) Since there's so much kudzu around, it would be good if we could actually find a use for it. If they could find an efficient way to turn kudzu into ethanol, we could have a near-endless supply of cheap ethanol for the foreseeable future.
how do you explain the continued existence of The Simpsons? The early seasons where the show was still somewhat grounded in reality were the best; in later seasons, the plot got more and more out there and it just became ridiculous. That show should have ended 10 seasons ago, but it seems to be stuck in "eternal" mode.
Re:Much more than you think leaves Word & Co.
on
MS Word 2010 Takes On TeX
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Actually I know of one publisher which uses Word from start to finish.
Who? I'm writing a book with LaTeX and I want to make sure that publisher isn't on my "potential publishers" list.
A dependency on rsync or any other mirroring technique alone is just plain negligent[snip]The only way to do backups properly is to have a complete set, offline, in a separate location.
For a medium-to-large business, I wholeheartedly agree with you.
However, what would be a good policy for small business (sole proprietorships or only a few people) or individuals? Not everyone can afford properly secured offline remote backups. The best effort that the average individual can do is set up a cron job rsync to a remote server if he/she has one and then do a few local rsyncs for redundancy every few hours. (this is what I do)
Sorry about double-posting, but I just remembered something else: how would the teacher's union react to this? I'm not very fond of unions, but this time it would be a good thing to have on our side. The teachers union holds quite a bit of clout in government and they probably wouldn't put up with BS like this. Their argument would probably be something along the lines of that teachers are [rightfully] too busy to waste their time recording movies with a camcorder just to please the movie industry. The MPAA would probably back down even if they got their way and then had to take on the unions.
Talk is cheap. How are they going to back it up? It's not like they can walk onto school grounds and force teachers to abide by this arbitrary policy that has no legal weight whatsoever.
I was planning on possibly using Elsevier as a potential publisher for my book (They aren't my first choice, but they are in the list of publishers I'm going to send proposals to) Now, I'm not so sure. I wonder if the other divisions of the company are still reputable, since the TFA implies that this fraud was the work of only one division.
Nothing is too big to fail. Falling for that mentality just supports a broken status quo. If the big players were removed, the smaller banks would have more room to grow. If a company can't stay viable, then it should die. It's strange how people here criticize the governemnt-supported measures taken to prop up the RIAA/MPAA business models but welcome government intervention in banks. It's all the same thing, really.
The bailouts are nothing but an excuse to nationalize the banks. I hate dealing with the private sector because I have to agree to their terms, but I hate dealing with the government far more. By taking the bailouts and the various TARP funds, the government would get power over the banks to some extent. Many banks who tried to return the TARP funds have been refused and would have to pay back more than they were given. This is just a power grab, plain and simple.
i'm not saying there was no pork, im saying that you're blowing it massively out of proportion.
How so? The whole piece of legislation was nothing but everyone's pet projects from the past 8 years or more. Pork is bad enough in good times, but this was just inexcusable in a recession. Pelosi and friends urged everyone in congress to get this thing passed while knowing full well what was in it.
Fox was the only channel that covered the protests adequately. CNN and the others had their own agenda. Remember the CNN reporter claiming on-site that the tax protests were anti-government, anti-CNN, and not suitable for family viewing? The media tends to be biased in one way or the other, but that was BLATANT.
A) let them fail and probably end up in Great Depression 2.0
If the bad banks fail, then only the good banks would be left. Many of the smaller local banks are doing fine while the big multi-region banks are the ones who are in trouble. (Citi, Bank of America, WaMU, etc.) The problem with your "B" option is that if banks can count on getting a bailout every time they screw up, then there's no reason for them to change how they do things.
If a bank takes a bailout, you would have to be a damn fool to trust that bank ever again.
I'm not talking about the normal budget. How do you explain some of the things that were in the Omnibus Bill as anything but pork? Off the top of my head, I remember the Omnibus setting money aside for dirt trail maintenance, a study on using pig waste as fertilizer, and subsidizing wooden arrow manufacturers. There's a whole lot more than that. How is all that essential for economic recovery?
Massive pork spending (The Omnibus bill had little else in it) and bailing out companies that should already be dead due to their own mismanagement is not going to help us in the long run. The money was given to the banks to loan out to people, but the banks did other things with it instead. (the AIG execs went out and had a lavish party) The whole reason for the housing crash in the first place is that the democrats forced the lenders to loan money to people who any sane lender would tell you could not afford a house.
I'm not saying that Bush II did everything right, but Obama has made the deficit much worse by continuing the bailouts and pushing that huge Omnibus bill. All of that can be laid directly at the democrats' feet. (the republicans aren't much better, but they weren't in power when all this happened) The US is probably going to end up defaulting on that debt since there is no feasible way to pay if off. They can try to raise taxes to do it, but all that is going to do is reduce everyone to peasant status.
Personally, I hope the tax protests are the first step in a revolution. Most people here in the US despise the way our government is going (big government, more bureaucracy, more waste, etc.) and we are sick of these politicians (People like Barney Frank and Pelosi especially come to mind) acting like all the money we make automatically belongs to them and that we are simply allowed to keep what is left over after they have taken what they want from us as tax. Government needs to be reminded that they serve US, not the other way around.
I'll agree with you, Widmer is great for a domestic hefewiezen, most other domestic wheat beers are too lemony from my experience. The only thing better than Widmer in my opinion is a good German import like Paulaner or Franziskaner if you can get them. I'll have to try some of the other stuff on your list.
Slashdot Mirror
I understand what you're trying to say. Personally, I'd rather be a middle-class free man than a highly-paid slave, but that's just what's good for me. On the other hand, some people like the luxurious life even if they have no free time left outside of work to enjoy it. I'm not saying that's the kind of life that's for everyone, but if someone wants to do it, that's their decision. Why should the government try to stop them? You can't be free if the government is able to tell you how to live your life. Mostly, I just want the government to leave me alone and not play any role in my life at all.
It's their money, they should be able to spend it as they see fit.
Furthermore, if you had to pay a huge national tax if you make above a certain amount (say $100k) where is the incentive to succeed if the system just punishes you for daring to strive for the lifestyle you want? In such a scenario You would be better off to earn less while paying less tax. Everyone loses.
What Gamestop is doing is hardly innovative; It's the college textbook business model. Buy it used, pay about 60-70% new price. (or worse) Sell it back at the end of the semester and you're lucky to recoup 40%. Back in my college days, I often did what I could to avoid buying textbooks because of rackets like that, but sometimes there was no other way.
Brute force is absolutely pointless, since there is not enough computing power on the planet to break AES-256 in any reasonable amount of time as far as I know. (they could start it up and come back in a few million years to see how it's doing) It's far easier to waterboard the password out of you.
The problem with your argument is that you treat all denominations as the same.
If you want to talk about indulgences, that's more of a Catholic issue. Protestants do not believe in that doctrine; rather, they believe that once you accept Christ, all sins are forgiven (past present, and future) and no further payment is required.
Also, don't make the mistake of thinking that all evangelicals are like the ones that have been discredited. It's just that the press thrives on scandal and you very seldom hear about the good ones.
It's not like people are required to give regularly. (many people pay monthly or quarterly) People give under the pretense that God has blessed them and they want to give part of that back out of gratitude. Whether you choose to give or not is up to you, and you give what you feel you should give. It's not like you should feel like you're paying dues or have a mentality where you expect to get something back. Most churches only keep track of how much you give if you pay through check (and that's more of a service to you so you know what to declare on your taxes) You always have the option of donating cash if you want to give anonymously.
I'm wondering if they can find a way to process Kudzu into ethanol. It's made out of cellulose (basically sugar) like any other plant, and sugar can be converted into ethanol. The unique thing about kudzu is it's incredible growth rate...we always have plenty of it. Here in the southern US, the damn plant literally grows at least foot a day in the summer and requires extensive maintenance to keep in check. (you can start with bare soil and have a 20-foot vine coming out of it in no time at all) Since there's so much kudzu around, it would be good if we could actually find a use for it. If they could find an efficient way to turn kudzu into ethanol, we could have a near-endless supply of cheap ethanol for the foreseeable future.
how do you explain the continued existence of The Simpsons? The early seasons where the show was still somewhat grounded in reality were the best; in later seasons, the plot got more and more out there and it just became ridiculous. That show should have ended 10 seasons ago, but it seems to be stuck in "eternal" mode.
Who? I'm writing a book with LaTeX and I want to make sure that publisher isn't on my "potential publishers" list.
For a medium-to-large business, I wholeheartedly agree with you.
However, what would be a good policy for small business (sole proprietorships or only a few people) or individuals? Not everyone can afford properly secured offline remote backups. The best effort that the average individual can do is set up a cron job rsync to a remote server if he/she has one and then do a few local rsyncs for redundancy every few hours. (this is what I do)
I'm guessing he meant central Florida. Summers in the southeast are like living in a greenhouse, but worse.
Well, if no one has respect for the law (the DMCA, in this case) then it is a bad law and should be revoked.
I know I'm preaching to the choir on that one....
Sorry about double-posting, but I just remembered something else: how would the teacher's union react to this? I'm not very fond of unions, but this time it would be a good thing to have on our side. The teachers union holds quite a bit of clout in government and they probably wouldn't put up with BS like this. Their argument would probably be something along the lines of that teachers are [rightfully] too busy to waste their time recording movies with a camcorder just to please the movie industry. The MPAA would probably back down even if they got their way and then had to take on the unions.
Talk is cheap. How are they going to back it up? It's not like they can walk onto school grounds and force teachers to abide by this arbitrary policy that has no legal weight whatsoever.
I was planning on possibly using Elsevier as a potential publisher for my book (They aren't my first choice, but they are in the list of publishers I'm going to send proposals to) Now, I'm not so sure. I wonder if the other divisions of the company are still reputable, since the TFA implies that this fraud was the work of only one division.
Nothing is too big to fail. Falling for that mentality just supports a broken status quo. If the big players were removed, the smaller banks would have more room to grow. If a company can't stay viable, then it should die. It's strange how people here criticize the governemnt-supported measures taken to prop up the RIAA/MPAA business models but welcome government intervention in banks. It's all the same thing, really.
The bailouts are nothing but an excuse to nationalize the banks. I hate dealing with the private sector because I have to agree to their terms, but I hate dealing with the government far more. By taking the bailouts and the various TARP funds, the government would get power over the banks to some extent. Many banks who tried to return the TARP funds have been refused and would have to pay back more than they were given. This is just a power grab, plain and simple.
How so? The whole piece of legislation was nothing but everyone's pet projects from the past 8 years or more. Pork is bad enough in good times, but this was just inexcusable in a recession. Pelosi and friends urged everyone in congress to get this thing passed while knowing full well what was in it.
Fox was the only channel that covered the protests adequately. CNN and the others had their own agenda. Remember the CNN reporter claiming on-site that the tax protests were anti-government, anti-CNN, and not suitable for family viewing? The media tends to be biased in one way or the other, but that was BLATANT.
If the bad banks fail, then only the good banks would be left. Many of the smaller local banks are doing fine while the big multi-region banks are the ones who are in trouble. (Citi, Bank of America, WaMU, etc.) The problem with your "B" option is that if banks can count on getting a bailout every time they screw up, then there's no reason for them to change how they do things.
If a bank takes a bailout, you would have to be a damn fool to trust that bank ever again.
I'm not talking about the normal budget. How do you explain some of the things that were in the Omnibus Bill as anything but pork? Off the top of my head, I remember the Omnibus setting money aside for dirt trail maintenance, a study on using pig waste as fertilizer, and subsidizing wooden arrow manufacturers. There's a whole lot more than that. How is all that essential for economic recovery?
Massive pork spending (The Omnibus bill had little else in it) and bailing out companies that should already be dead due to their own mismanagement is not going to help us in the long run. The money was given to the banks to loan out to people, but the banks did other things with it instead. (the AIG execs went out and had a lavish party) The whole reason for the housing crash in the first place is that the democrats forced the lenders to loan money to people who any sane lender would tell you could not afford a house.
Obama is not conservative. Not even close.
I'm not saying that Bush II did everything right, but Obama has made the deficit much worse by continuing the bailouts and pushing that huge Omnibus bill. All of that can be laid directly at the democrats' feet. (the republicans aren't much better, but they weren't in power when all this happened) The US is probably going to end up defaulting on that debt since there is no feasible way to pay if off. They can try to raise taxes to do it, but all that is going to do is reduce everyone to peasant status.
Personally, I hope the tax protests are the first step in a revolution. Most people here in the US despise the way our government is going (big government, more bureaucracy, more waste, etc.) and we are sick of these politicians (People like Barney Frank and Pelosi especially come to mind) acting like all the money we make automatically belongs to them and that we are simply allowed to keep what is left over after they have taken what they want from us as tax. Government needs to be reminded that they serve US, not the other way around.
I'll agree with you, Widmer is great for a domestic hefewiezen, most other domestic wheat beers are too lemony from my experience. The only thing better than Widmer in my opinion is a good German import like Paulaner or Franziskaner if you can get them. I'll have to try some of the other stuff on your list.
Ever had Czechvar?