I don't boycott Sony, but I refuse to buy anything electronic from them, the bastards rooted my PC ten years ago. It was vandalism against thousands of people and someone should have gone to jail for it.
Then they pitched OtherOS and removed it after the poor suckers bought it (should have learned from XCP). Like your car dealer taking out your cars AC after you've paid for the car.
Boycott? Nope, I just don't buy and laugh wildly when I see someone that does. No good can come from buying a Sony product, they've proven time and again that their customers can't trust them.
And like Sterling Ball* says about Microsoft, I refuse to do business with someone who treats me badly.
* CEO of the Ernie Ball company, who make the famous guitar strings used by everybody.
I don't want one. I remember when I was a kid and cinerama was new; the theaters had curved screens. I hated those theaters, and it would be worse on a phone.
If you voted Democrat or Republican, it's your own fault pot is illegal. Vote Green or Libertarian, depending on whether you're liberal or conservative; both of those parties are against the drug laws.
Windows has traditionally lagged behind other OSes feature-wise. Linux supported multiple monitors years before Windows did, and my kubuntu box has features my W7 notebook sorely lacks (like not having to reboot the goddamned thing every month).
Not being Windows is a benefit because Windows is just not a very good OS. It never had to be, thanks to their monopoly. Look how much better telephony got after AT&T was broken up.
As to "fragmentation" I think a better word is CHOICE. Hate Gnome? Use KDE or other desktop. Fragmentation is a non-issue cooked up by worried MS marketers.
But I set up cloud printing for my mother in law in about 10 minutes, and she can happily print from her tablet through to her PC.
Indeed, "interoperability" is yet another lie cooked up by MS marketing. The truth is it's Windows that not only lacks interoperability but designs its lack into its products. Hell, try opening a Word 2007 document in Word 98; MS isn't even interoperable with itself.
Driver support is a dead issue, Linux hasn't had many driver problems in years, not that I've seen anyway. The only devices that won't work with Linux are those designed to be windows-only (e.g., winmodems).
I think you responded to a shill, or to someone who's never used anything but Windows.
What on earth can Android support that a traditional PC (Windows or Linux) can't?
AFAIK a touchscreen, at least on Windows. They've had (if I remember the name correctly) MegaGame machines in bars for over a decade that were touch-only and ran Liinux, as it was easy to tell when one was booted (I don't remember what distro, probably Red Hat). I haven't heard of any version of Windows before W8 that would.
I imagine that Windows applications are more likely to support offline use than Android applications, especially because Android was first sold on phones.
My Android phone supports offline use, probably because I pay my carrier a flat rate for unlimited everything and my using it offline or on wifi saves them money. My guess is other carriers disable the ability so they can run your bill up higher.
I'd rather they take those stupid damned touchscreens out of cars completely. Give me physical knobs and buttons that stay in one place that I know where they are and I can make an adjustment without taking my eyes off of the road.
Those were the days when column after column of the front pages of the newspapers shouted the news of strikes and and-Bolshevist riots; when radicals shot do* Armistice Day paraders in the streets of Centralia, Washington, and in revenge the patriotic citizenry took out of the jail a member of the I. W. W.-a white American, be it noted-and lynched him by tying a rope around his neck and throwing him off a bridge; when properly elected members of the Assembly of New York State were expelled (and their constituents thereby disfranchised) simply because they had been elected as members of the venerable Socialist Party; when a jury in Indiana took two minutes to acquit a man for shooting and killing an alien because he had shouted, "To hell with the United States"; and when the Vice-President or the nation cited as a dangerous manifestation of radicalism in the women's colleges the fact that the girl debaters of Radcliffe had upheld the affirmative in an intercollegiate debate on the subject: "Resolved, that the recognition of labor unions by employers is essential to successful collective bargaining." It was an era of lawless and disorderly defense of law and order, of unconstitutional defense of the Constitution, of suspicion and civil conflict-in a very literal sense, a reign of terror.
* OCR error, I have the printed book. There are quite a few OCR errors in the University of Virginia copy.
This is just an incrimental improvement; Ford has had self-parking cars for years. I know a guy who has one. What's new is you can get out and tell it to park with your phone. I guess what Bill has is partially assisted parking? But he doesn't touch the wheel or pedals when it's parking itself.
Much more interesting is the object avoidance, which is afaik is completely new. It warns you if you're going to hit something, and if you ignore it it will brake and take over steering. Too bad this lady didn't have it. Or this guy (does Ford make semis?)
You obviously don't see where yours is. Rape has a victim, someone illegally possessing drugs does not. Dope addicts should not be my problem, but drug laws make them my problem. I live on the edge of the ghetto (I'm a cheap old bastard and it's close to work) and my house has been burglarized twice in four years. When did you ever hear of someone stealing for beer money?
That was the most insightful thing I've seen in this thread, thank you. There was a slashdot topic a while back, and I asked Samantha Wright about neurochemistry affects the brain, and she replied with this link, which isn't chemistry at all but a fascinating treatise on human cultures (and in fact answered my question). We are all products of our environments. The linked article notes that westerners are weird, and the weirdest of the westerners is Americans from testing different peoples.
If less crazy Republicans don't stop kowtowing to the crazy wing, they're dead. And you're right, even if they unshackle themselves from the crazy extremists they're going to have to attract women and Hispanics. Radical transformation is all that can save them.
It would have helped if many of those people whose homes were foreclosed during the housing crisis had basic math skills
It wasn't "basic math skills" it was lack of information.Who could have known that gasoline, the price of which had pretty much the same for over fifteen years, would more than quadruple in the next seven? The twenty dollars it took to commute to and from work for a week was now eighty. They had no clue, nor did anyone else, that they were going to have to incur an additional $300 a month in expenses? Who would have guessed that the housing market would collapse and their house would be worth far less than they'd bought it for for it?
Don't blame their math skills, blame the oil men in the White House and the Wall Street bankers in Congress. They're the ones who crashed the economy.
Your solution to crime is to make nothing illegal.
Excuse me, but your strawman is awfully close to the flames, you wouldn't want him to burn down. Subsidized access? Dude, you're on slashdot, there are fewer people her that will fall for that stupidity than, say, reddit.
Look at the single most dangerous drug in the world -- alcohol. More people die from alcohol overdoses (they call it "alcohol poisoning", I don't know why it gets a different nomenclature than other drugs) than all other drugs combined. In the US they outlawed it in 1919 thinking all the boozers would dry up. What you got instead was speakeasies, smuggling, bathtub gin, and Al Capone. Drugs don't cause violent crime, drug laws cause violent crime. Look at Chicago in 1925 and Chicago today -- different drugs, same results.
Victimless crimes cause crimes with victims. Crack cocaine is ridiculously expensive because of its illegality. If it were legal it would be a dollar an ounce rather than twenty for half a gram, and my house probably wouldn't have been burglarized twice in the last 4 years.
Ever heard of an alcoholic who stole to support his habit? Me, either.
Legalizing and regulating victimless activity will cut crime rates drastically. You'll always have thieves and violent people, but take illegal drugs out of the equation by making all of them legal (I'd keep antibiotics illegal, your taking unnecessary antibiotics does harm me) and your property crimes and violent crimes will plummet greatly.
Do you know who is most likely to die from heroin overdose (BTW, a "heroine" is a female hero)? Somebody who has gone through rehab and stayed clean for a while. If they fall off the wagon they no longer have the tolerance they did when they were shooting daily, and what would have given them the slightest buzz before rehab is enough to kill them.
And how good are the laws at keeping these people from overdosing? It looks to me like they don't work at all.
The junkie buying from a street dealer gets stuff that varies wildly in strength and purity. Legalize and regulate it and you'll have far fewer deaths.
Nope, the only time I ever went outside the US was in the Air Force.
As to Johnathon Swift, did you bother reading your own link? "A Modest Proposal" was satire. As to the Irish (who I'm descended from), the famous Irishman Oscar Wilde said "work is the curse of the drinking class."
Comcast wants twice what AT&T wants for internet alone. What's worse they send paper spam here daily and even had a god damned spammer ring my damned doorbell a couple of days ago!
I don't need the extra speed, I live alone and DSL suffices. There's no reason for me to pay for extra speed. And I don't need or have a landline, either. Just DSL, smartphone, and an antenna for OTA TV.
You've been fooled by the corporate media who tell you that a vote for a "third party" is wasted. The fact is that there are five parties that were on enough ballots to win the last several Presidential elections if anyone knew they were viable.
The Ds and Rs want some of your friends and relatives (and maybe even you) in prison for smoking pot. Neither the Gs nor Ls do. Both majors are for insanely long copyrights, DMCA and draconian penalties for sharing songs, crazy patent laws... both major parties are against the things I'm for and for the things I'm against, yet I should vote for one of them and ignore a candidate who shares my beliefs because he'll lose because "a losing vote is a wasted vote"?
If a vote for a loser is wasted, then all those people who voted for Romney wasted their votes. I say voting for a man who wants your loved ones in prison is beyond stupid. Who's the one wasting their vote here?
Buyers are not much at risk. It is the sellers they are after.
Bullshit, they're after everyone. My friend's brother spent five years in Federal prison, as well as half his high school graduating class. His crime? A guy he'd gone to high school with called him needing $1000 so he could get a lawyer -- he'd been busted for selling cocaine. He said he'd pay him back double in a week.
Mike's brother and twenty or more other people were convicted for "conspiracy to distribute cocaine." All of them spent five years in prison, except that guy who was actually selling drugs who spent only two for helping the feds prosecute innocent men, and few if any of them had anything whatever to do with drugs.
They don't care that you're innocent, they want you in prison. You don't even have to be a buyer to go to prison for dope, just loan the wrong person money.
Slashdot Mirror
Why boycott Sony?
I don't boycott Sony, but I refuse to buy anything electronic from them, the bastards rooted my PC ten years ago. It was vandalism against thousands of people and someone should have gone to jail for it.
Then they pitched OtherOS and removed it after the poor suckers bought it (should have learned from XCP). Like your car dealer taking out your cars AC after you've paid for the car.
Boycott? Nope, I just don't buy and laugh wildly when I see someone that does. No good can come from buying a Sony product, they've proven time and again that their customers can't trust them.
And like Sterling Ball* says about Microsoft, I refuse to do business with someone who treats me badly.
* CEO of the Ernie Ball company, who make the famous guitar strings used by everybody.
I don't want one. I remember when I was a kid and cinerama was new; the theaters had curved screens. I hated those theaters, and it would be worse on a phone.
New isn't necessarily better.
10 years for growing the wrong plant.
If you voted Democrat or Republican, it's your own fault pot is illegal. Vote Green or Libertarian, depending on whether you're liberal or conservative; both of those parties are against the drug laws.
Well, it has the benefit of not being Windows.
Windows has traditionally lagged behind other OSes feature-wise. Linux supported multiple monitors years before Windows did, and my kubuntu box has features my W7 notebook sorely lacks (like not having to reboot the goddamned thing every month).
Not being Windows is a benefit because Windows is just not a very good OS. It never had to be, thanks to their monopoly. Look how much better telephony got after AT&T was broken up.
As to "fragmentation" I think a better word is CHOICE. Hate Gnome? Use KDE or other desktop. Fragmentation is a non-issue cooked up by worried MS marketers.
But I set up cloud printing for my mother in law in about 10 minutes, and she can happily print from her tablet through to her PC.
Indeed, "interoperability" is yet another lie cooked up by MS marketing. The truth is it's Windows that not only lacks interoperability but designs its lack into its products. Hell, try opening a Word 2007 document in Word 98; MS isn't even interoperable with itself.
Driver support is a dead issue, Linux hasn't had many driver problems in years, not that I've seen anyway. The only devices that won't work with Linux are those designed to be windows-only (e.g., winmodems).
I think you responded to a shill, or to someone who's never used anything but Windows.
What on earth can Android support that a traditional PC (Windows or Linux) can't?
AFAIK a touchscreen, at least on Windows. They've had (if I remember the name correctly) MegaGame machines in bars for over a decade that were touch-only and ran Liinux, as it was easy to tell when one was booted (I don't remember what distro, probably Red Hat). I haven't heard of any version of Windows before W8 that would.
I imagine that Windows applications are more likely to support offline use than Android applications, especially because Android was first sold on phones.
My Android phone supports offline use, probably because I pay my carrier a flat rate for unlimited everything and my using it offline or on wifi saves them money. My guess is other carriers disable the ability so they can run your bill up higher.
But Android does indeed support offline use.
I'd rather they take those stupid damned touchscreens out of cars completely. Give me physical knobs and buttons that stay in one place that I know where they are and I can make an adjustment without taking my eyes off of the road.
Touchscreens in cars are dangerous.
Chapter III
* OCR error, I have the printed book. There are quite a few OCR errors in the University of Virginia copy.
You've got enough brain-dead biggots in your country to make it as bad any backwards theocracy.
Oh, the irony. It looks like there's at least one in your country, who's bigoted against both Americans and against anyone who isn't atheist.
Have you seen how atheist Russia treats homosexuals, bigot? Bigotry has nothing to do with religion.
This is just an incrimental improvement; Ford has had self-parking cars for years. I know a guy who has one. What's new is you can get out and tell it to park with your phone. I guess what Bill has is partially assisted parking? But he doesn't touch the wheel or pedals when it's parking itself.
Much more interesting is the object avoidance, which is afaik is completely new. It warns you if you're going to hit something, and if you ignore it it will brake and take over steering. Too bad this lady didn't have it. Or this guy (does Ford make semis?)
Maybe he's not a coward?
Disney calls them "imagineers". These guys were making androids decades ago.
Do you not see where your reasoning is flawed?
You obviously don't see where yours is. Rape has a victim, someone illegally possessing drugs does not. Dope addicts should not be my problem, but drug laws make them my problem. I live on the edge of the ghetto (I'm a cheap old bastard and it's close to work) and my house has been burglarized twice in four years. When did you ever hear of someone stealing for beer money?
Read this. Prohibition doesn't work.
That was the most insightful thing I've seen in this thread, thank you. There was a slashdot topic a while back, and I asked Samantha Wright about neurochemistry affects the brain, and she replied with this link, which isn't chemistry at all but a fascinating treatise on human cultures (and in fact answered my question). We are all products of our environments. The linked article notes that westerners are weird, and the weirdest of the westerners is Americans from testing different peoples.
Well, the first post linked to a picture of the three stooges so...
If less crazy Republicans don't stop kowtowing to the crazy wing, they're dead. And you're right, even if they unshackle themselves from the crazy extremists they're going to have to attract women and Hispanics. Radical transformation is all that can save them.
I wonder who will replace them?
Or start voting for people who don't want you in prison.
It would have helped if many of those people whose homes were foreclosed during the housing crisis had basic math skills
It wasn't "basic math skills" it was lack of information.Who could have known that gasoline, the price of which had pretty much the same for over fifteen years, would more than quadruple in the next seven? The twenty dollars it took to commute to and from work for a week was now eighty. They had no clue, nor did anyone else, that they were going to have to incur an additional $300 a month in expenses? Who would have guessed that the housing market would collapse and their house would be worth far less than they'd bought it for for it?
Don't blame their math skills, blame the oil men in the White House and the Wall Street bankers in Congress. They're the ones who crashed the economy.
Your solution to crime is to make nothing illegal.
Excuse me, but your strawman is awfully close to the flames, you wouldn't want him to burn down. Subsidized access? Dude, you're on slashdot, there are fewer people her that will fall for that stupidity than, say, reddit.
Look at the single most dangerous drug in the world -- alcohol. More people die from alcohol overdoses (they call it "alcohol poisoning", I don't know why it gets a different nomenclature than other drugs) than all other drugs combined. In the US they outlawed it in 1919 thinking all the boozers would dry up. What you got instead was speakeasies, smuggling, bathtub gin, and Al Capone. Drugs don't cause violent crime, drug laws cause violent crime. Look at Chicago in 1925 and Chicago today -- different drugs, same results.
Victimless crimes cause crimes with victims. Crack cocaine is ridiculously expensive because of its illegality. If it were legal it would be a dollar an ounce rather than twenty for half a gram, and my house probably wouldn't have been burglarized twice in the last 4 years.
Ever heard of an alcoholic who stole to support his habit? Me, either.
Legalizing and regulating victimless activity will cut crime rates drastically. You'll always have thieves and violent people, but take illegal drugs out of the equation by making all of them legal (I'd keep antibiotics illegal, your taking unnecessary antibiotics does harm me) and your property crimes and violent crimes will plummet greatly.
Do you know who is most likely to die from heroin overdose (BTW, a "heroine" is a female hero)? Somebody who has gone through rehab and stayed clean for a while. If they fall off the wagon they no longer have the tolerance they did when they were shooting daily, and what would have given them the slightest buzz before rehab is enough to kill them.
And how good are the laws at keeping these people from overdosing? It looks to me like they don't work at all.
The junkie buying from a street dealer gets stuff that varies wildly in strength and purity. Legalize and regulate it and you'll have far fewer deaths.
It's based on what I've read, almost all of it from printed books by biologists and veterinarians. No two species thinks or acts alike.
You're not Canadian by any chance, are you?
Nope, the only time I ever went outside the US was in the Air Force.
As to Johnathon Swift, did you bother reading your own link? "A Modest Proposal" was satire. As to the Irish (who I'm descended from), the famous Irishman Oscar Wilde said "work is the curse of the drinking class."
Comcast wants twice what AT&T wants for internet alone. What's worse they send paper spam here daily and even had a god damned spammer ring my damned doorbell a couple of days ago!
I don't need the extra speed, I live alone and DSL suffices. There's no reason for me to pay for extra speed. And I don't need or have a landline, either. Just DSL, smartphone, and an antenna for OTA TV.
You've been fooled by the corporate media who tell you that a vote for a "third party" is wasted. The fact is that there are five parties that were on enough ballots to win the last several Presidential elections if anyone knew they were viable.
The Ds and Rs want some of your friends and relatives (and maybe even you) in prison for smoking pot. Neither the Gs nor Ls do. Both majors are for insanely long copyrights, DMCA and draconian penalties for sharing songs, crazy patent laws... both major parties are against the things I'm for and for the things I'm against, yet I should vote for one of them and ignore a candidate who shares my beliefs because he'll lose because "a losing vote is a wasted vote"?
If a vote for a loser is wasted, then all those people who voted for Romney wasted their votes. I say voting for a man who wants your loved ones in prison is beyond stupid. Who's the one wasting their vote here?
Buyers are not much at risk. It is the sellers they are after.
Bullshit, they're after everyone. My friend's brother spent five years in Federal prison, as well as half his high school graduating class. His crime? A guy he'd gone to high school with called him needing $1000 so he could get a lawyer -- he'd been busted for selling cocaine. He said he'd pay him back double in a week.
Mike's brother and twenty or more other people were convicted for "conspiracy to distribute cocaine." All of them spent five years in prison, except that guy who was actually selling drugs who spent only two for helping the feds prosecute innocent men, and few if any of them had anything whatever to do with drugs.
They don't care that you're innocent, they want you in prison. You don't even have to be a buyer to go to prison for dope, just loan the wrong person money.