Hmmm... I suggest exploding dye packs. And when the blue painted guy has you hauled off the plane as a potential terrorist you can have him arrested for attempted theft.
Ok... Its not a perfect plan... but it would at least raise question why my valuable X got more than Y feet from my suitcase.
I really have no objection to websiteX tracking my movements through websiteX.
I don't see why I should have to submit to Google tracking my movements through websiteX, websiteY, websiteZ, and half a million other sites though.
The closest thing we have right now to this in the real world is VISA. But they only track your purchases, not everywhere you go. And it is pretty easy to simply not pay for everything with VISA and avoid being tracked.
Its not akin to someone looking into your house, its akin to the cashier person looking at your purchases at the supermarket and next time offering you something you might like. You're using their website/advertising service and they're seeing what works.
No. This analogy fails because the cashier looking at my purchases at the supermarket doesn't follow me to the mall to record what I buy there too, then follow me to the ballgame, then follow me to the movies, then follow me to the gastation.
These 3rd party tracking companies do there best to track you everywhere on the web, and some of them have a VERY wide coverage. There are places you can go that don't use let them watch you, but its astonishing how many places that do. If they use analytics, google ads, or doubleclick... google knows you went there. That's a huge percentage of the web, and most of the major portal sites. Including slashdot.
Does the girl at the supermarket stand behind you and read over your shoulder while your on slashdot? No... I didn't think so.:)
Remember, distrust in a relationship is more often a sign of what you're willing to do than what they are.
You can reach a point where you trusted them just fine, and then you find out one way or another that they betrayed that trust and are cheating on you.
At that point, what then? They've ALREADY betrayed you, and haven't told you the truth. The relationship is already unhinged. Putting a GPS tracker on the car isn't about trust, its simply evidence gathering for the inevitable court proceedings.
Never did I say that people should all draw the same conclusion as me, or any abstract single conclusion.
It was implied by the construction of your post that that your conclusion was closer to the "truth" than that of others. Otherwise why hold the two in stark contrast?
Suppose you, through self introspection and the study of philosophy had come to the conclusion that stealing was generally wrong would you then immediately derisively comment in the next sentence on how so much of society relied on 'taught morality' that had long ago reached precisely the same conclusion?
. I study, hypothesize, test and question until I find the closest thing I can to truth. Somebody whose morality is dictated to them by another authority is by definition a sheep.
But your conclusions are at best right for you, and are founded upon attitudes toward sex, love, relationships that you hold. You may have analyzed those attitudes and formed a conclusion consistent with them, but at best its still a whole lot of you in there.
Other people can have enlightened introspection and come to different conclusions without being "wrong" and without being any more guilty of being an "automaton".
There is nothing inherently morally correct about being promiscuous. The most you can do is convince yourself there is nothing inherently immoral about it if all the stars are aligned just so. (In that your primary partner feels precisely as you do, for starters.)
In my case, given a choice between having someone new, or spending time with my wife, I'd choose the latter. That's not "goverments and gods" telling me what i should do, that's simply what I'd prefer to do. And I find it infuriating that someone should pretend I'm somehow not as enlightened as them.
I am living the life I want to live the way I want to live it. And I have put at least as much consideration into what I wish to do with my life as you have. We have come to different conclusions on what is right for us.
No, its exactly the same as a hill. You are absolutely climbing, your upward movement is just cancelled out by the downward movement of the treadmill, just as your forward movement is cancelled out by the reverse motion of the treadmill.
Make no mistake, you ARE climbing in opposition to gravity on an inclined treadmill, not merely working different muscles.
Microsoft contributed nothing to the development of this phone, except being the first ones to patent specific ideas. I'm all for protecting processes, but our patent system really needs to be fixed.
Substitute "a small inventor in his garage" though...
A small inventor in his garage contributed nothing to the development of this phone, except being the first one to patent specific ideas.
Would he have a claim to force Samsung to pay up? Would you support him, or crap all over him?
The one I've never understood is when they incline a treadmill. I mean, surely people realize that running up an incline is challenging because you are physically *moving* your body in opposition to gravity. Tilting a treadmill just forces you to raise your knees higher when you run, which is a bit harder, I suppose, but not at all analogous.
-facepalm-
Tilting a treadmill is exactly the same as running up a hill, in that you are moving your body up an inclined plane in opposition to gravity.
Its just that your actual upward progress is cancelled out by the downward movement of the treadmill, but you have to continually climb upwards just to stay where you are on the incline. But make no mistake, you are still climbing.
Walking up a "down" escalator is essentially the same thing.
Then large companies would begin paying lawyers low retainers/fees, but with tons of benefits
The IRS has managed to figure out how to audit such things as "benefits" for the purposes of taxing it as income. The methods and expertise to do this already exists.
'That is not your Ferrari, it is the People's Ferrari. Now give me the keys or else!'
And that's hypocrisy on its face.
If its the peoples Ferrari why should you get the keys?
Most families are quite socialist. They often share cars, houses, food. The ones that are employed cover the expenses of the ones that are not. If someone is ill, the others pick up the slack. If grandma gets sick, she comes to live with you... or you bring her care packages and pay her bills...
Yeah, that's pretty greedy.
Socialism is saying it doesn't end at the family, my community should be treated the same way, or why just the community my countrymen should be treated the same way.
In practice, it works fine up to a small community.
Larger than that... well... nobody's got a good solution for that yet.
Well ain't karma a bitch? Obama walked in and spent the first half of his presidency telling the Republicans to go fuck themselves and that he didn't need or want their cooperation because he had a majority and could cram anything he wanted down their throats.
Actually Repubicans were being obstructionist since the beginning.
Did Columbus discover the Americas? Yes (from a European perspective, anyway)
Icelandic Vikings had a colony in Canada long before Columbus.
There is also a Portuguese map that's recognizably the American coast dating back to 1424, and a fair bit of evidence that the Basque's and the Portuguese fished off of Newfoundland and had dealings with the natives... but had never established colonies.
Columbus may be the public face of discovery, and important for making "the new world" a big deal in Europe, but he wasn't the first European. I can assure you the Portuguese scoff at Columbus... and I imagine Icelandic folk roll their eyes at the whole affair as well.
Same effective "polarity" but for different reasons.
In that Bush just did whatever he wanted = highly polar.
And that Obama can't get the republican congress to agree to anything unless its the exact position of the republican congress... and only then if its clear it was their idea first. = highly polar... but its just not the same.
Slashdot Mirror
Its not the PC police.
The game is still sold as as "Snakes and Ladders" in many places from other vendors, even in the US.
Its "Chutes and Ladders" to many because that's what Milton Bradley called his version when he "introduced" the game to the United States in the 40s.
I expect it was probably done for copyright and / trademark / marketing reasons not PC reasons.
Why? because two seasons worth of animated series wasn't enough?
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0083461/
Hence my noting that the blue painted man will have you hauled off the plane as a potential terrorist. And that the plan wasn't perfect.
Even if you did something obscure but unique
Hmmm... I suggest exploding dye packs. And when the blue painted guy has you hauled off the plane as a potential terrorist you can have him arrested for attempted theft.
Ok... Its not a perfect plan... but it would at least raise question why my valuable X got more than Y feet from my suitcase.
I really have no objection to websiteX tracking my movements through websiteX.
I don't see why I should have to submit to Google tracking my movements through websiteX, websiteY, websiteZ, and half a million other sites though.
The closest thing we have right now to this in the real world is VISA. But they only track your purchases, not everywhere you go. And it is pretty easy to simply not pay for everything with VISA and avoid being tracked.
Its not akin to someone looking into your house, its akin to the cashier person looking at your purchases at the supermarket and next time offering you something you might like. You're using their website/advertising service and they're seeing what works.
No. This analogy fails because the cashier looking at my purchases at the supermarket doesn't follow me to the mall to record what I buy there too, then follow me to the ballgame, then follow me to the movies, then follow me to the gastation.
These 3rd party tracking companies do there best to track you everywhere on the web, and some of them have a VERY wide coverage. There are places you can go that don't use let them watch you, but its astonishing how many places that do. If they use analytics, google ads, or doubleclick... google knows you went there. That's a huge percentage of the web, and most of the major portal sites. Including slashdot.
Does the girl at the supermarket stand behind you and read over your shoulder while your on slashdot? No... I didn't think so. :)
Remember, distrust in a relationship is more often a sign of what you're willing to do than what they are.
You can reach a point where you trusted them just fine, and then you find out one way or another that they betrayed that trust and are cheating on you.
At that point, what then? They've ALREADY betrayed you, and haven't told you the truth. The relationship is already unhinged. Putting a GPS tracker on the car isn't about trust, its simply evidence gathering for the inevitable court proceedings.
Never did I say that people should all draw the same conclusion as me, or any abstract single conclusion.
It was implied by the construction of your post that that your conclusion was closer to the "truth" than that of others. Otherwise why hold the two in stark contrast?
Suppose you, through self introspection and the study of philosophy had come to the conclusion that stealing was generally wrong would you then immediately derisively comment in the next sentence on how so much of society relied on 'taught morality' that had long ago reached precisely the same conclusion?
I think not.
. I study, hypothesize, test and question until I find the closest thing I can to truth. Somebody whose morality is dictated to them by another authority is by definition a sheep.
But your conclusions are at best right for you, and are founded upon attitudes toward sex, love, relationships that you hold. You may have analyzed those attitudes and formed a conclusion consistent with them, but at best its still a whole lot of you in there.
Other people can have enlightened introspection and come to different conclusions without being "wrong" and without being any more guilty of being an "automaton".
There is nothing inherently morally correct about being promiscuous. The most you can do is convince yourself there is nothing inherently immoral about it if all the stars are aligned just so. (In that your primary partner feels precisely as you do, for starters.)
In my case, given a choice between having someone new, or spending time with my wife, I'd choose the latter. That's not "goverments and gods" telling me what i should do, that's simply what I'd prefer to do. And I find it infuriating that someone should pretend I'm somehow not as enlightened as them.
I am living the life I want to live the way I want to live it. And I have put at least as much consideration into what I wish to do with my life as you have. We have come to different conclusions on what is right for us.
Most (or at least many) Japanese cars are actually manufactured in the United States.
I think a lot of assembly is done here. -- there are all kinds of tax and related incentives and so forth for doing it here. (1)
I'm curious how much of the actual component work is done here.
(1) -- VWs made in Mexico benefit from NAFTA, while those from Germany are still subject to import duties... at least in Canada., for example.
Because -that- was the only part of his post anyone can find fault with. ROFLMAOBBQ!!
The answer involves things far beyond newbie's understanding.
Not all of us here are newbies, and while I may agree with you... I still want to know why YOU think it should not be done.
You do not want credit card processors deciding if merchants are legitimate. Trust me.
They already do this. Half of them won't even give you an account if your in any of several lines of legitimate business, nevermind illegitimate ones.
No, its exactly the same as a hill. You are absolutely climbing, your upward movement is just cancelled out by the downward movement of the treadmill, just as your forward movement is cancelled out by the reverse motion of the treadmill.
Make no mistake, you ARE climbing in opposition to gravity on an inclined treadmill, not merely working different muscles.
The value of a few weak patents is probably not as much as the off the shelf price for an entire operating system.
Since when do patents have to be licensed at reasonable price points?
In fact, patents don't have to be licensed at all!
Microsoft contributed nothing to the development of this phone, except being the first ones to patent specific ideas. I'm all for protecting processes, but our patent system really needs to be fixed.
Substitute "a small inventor in his garage" though...
A small inventor in his garage contributed nothing to the development of this phone, except being the first one to patent specific ideas.
Would he have a claim to force Samsung to pay up? Would you support him, or crap all over him?
The one I've never understood is when they incline a treadmill. I mean, surely people realize that running up an incline is challenging because you are physically *moving* your body in opposition to gravity. Tilting a treadmill just forces you to raise your knees higher when you run, which is a bit harder, I suppose, but not at all analogous.
-facepalm-
Tilting a treadmill is exactly the same as running up a hill, in that you are moving your body up an inclined plane in opposition to gravity.
Its just that your actual upward progress is cancelled out by the downward movement of the treadmill, but you have to continually climb upwards just to stay where you are on the incline. But make no mistake, you are still climbing.
Walking up a "down" escalator is essentially the same thing.
Then large companies would begin paying lawyers low retainers/fees, but with tons of benefits
The IRS has managed to figure out how to audit such things as "benefits" for the purposes of taxing it as income. The methods and expertise to do this already exists.
Ah yes, because not bowing in submission to the other party is "being obstructionist".
Ah no. "Being obstructionist" is being obstructionist.
No one buy you said anything about bowing down in submission.
Probably simplest to start with the Wikipedia article on the book, and follow the references...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gavin_Menzies#Criticism_of_1421
'That is not your Ferrari, it is the People's Ferrari. Now give me the keys or else!'
And that's hypocrisy on its face.
If its the peoples Ferrari why should you get the keys?
Most families are quite socialist. They often share cars, houses, food. The ones that are employed cover the expenses of the ones that are not. If someone is ill, the others pick up the slack. If grandma gets sick, she comes to live with you... or you bring her care packages and pay her bills...
Yeah, that's pretty greedy.
Socialism is saying it doesn't end at the family, my community should be treated the same way, or why just the community my countrymen should be treated the same way.
In practice, it works fine up to a small community.
Larger than that... well... nobody's got a good solution for that yet.
Apple are marketing people./em
Apple is lawyers as much as marketing.
Well ain't karma a bitch? Obama walked in and spent the first half of his presidency telling the Republicans to go fuck themselves and that he didn't need or want their cooperation because he had a majority and could cram anything he wanted down their throats.
Actually Repubicans were being obstructionist since the beginning.
"1421: The Year China Discovered the World" by Gavin Menzies, in case you haven't read it yet. A lot of what he writes seems to be solid.
That theory, and that book in particular has been thoroughly discredited.
Did Columbus discover the Americas? Yes (from a European perspective, anyway)
Icelandic Vikings had a colony in Canada long before Columbus.
There is also a Portuguese map that's recognizably the American coast dating back to 1424, and a fair bit of evidence that the Basque's and the Portuguese fished off of Newfoundland and had dealings with the natives... but had never established colonies.
Columbus may be the public face of discovery, and important for making "the new world" a big deal in Europe, but he wasn't the first European. I can assure you the Portuguese scoff at Columbus... and I imagine Icelandic folk roll their eyes at the whole affair as well.
The Bushes and Obama have been far more polar.
Same effective "polarity" but for different reasons.
In that Bush just did whatever he wanted = highly polar.
And that Obama can't get the republican congress to agree to anything unless its the exact position of the republican congress... and only then if its clear it was their idea first. = highly polar... but its just not the same.