Some of the root causes as to why the banking system flopped and even got into the sub-prime market go back into the nineties. After the great depression, laws were written that were suppposed to protect against it happening again. The first put barriers in place against inter-locking directorates in banks. Banks were no longer permitted to have decision making directors who were also company directors in the investment industry. I forget the exact name of the law. But it was repealed in 1998 I believe. Both parties had to be involved for the vote to carry as the congress had a Republican majority. But the sponsor and a main part of its support was from the Democrat Party. A second law put in place was to protect money in accounts up to $100,000. That was so people didn't rush to get their money out when banks started collapsing. That law was still in effect and worked. So NO, no one would have lost their money, just because a bank went out. Instead, the banks that were smart and stayed out of the sub-prime would have made a killing. Good for them.
I couldn't agree with you more. I ended out voting libertarian, though knew they couldn't win. The two main parties are sort of like chocolate and strawberry milk - two flavors of the same thing (though not as tasty). I think there are a few Republicans in the House that have some respect for balancing the budget. At least they (initially) opposed the buyout. But other than that, I'm not so sure
Be careful of your thoughts; they could become words and deeds at any minute.
In light of that, I once heard a Senator talking on the radio about what it was like trying to get finances for re-election. At the time, he was no longer running for re-election. To start out, he would start calling various businesses and organizations to ask for donations. One of the first things he would hear would be something like, "What can you do for me?" Or, he would hear, "What can you do TO me?" By the end of day, he said he was pretty burnt out and felt like someones cheap whore (not an exact quote, but it's pretty close).
I had to admit, I didn't like what he said, but I admired hearing some honesty. So that's how it works!
Funny thing is, lignite is almost pure Carbon. Burning it with Oxygen produces energy. If we split the resulting CO2 back into C and O2, our energy surplus turns into an energy deficit and gives us what we started with. Only we went to a lot of trouble for nothing. But what is really accomplished by storing it under the earth? Plants Do need CO2. Why not give them some extra CO2 and they may work more efficiently to produce growth and give off more oxygen. Has anyone ever really tested this?
Global Warming - A new and improved version of Global Cooling.
And sometimes it works in reverse. If you find a male in theater who actually has dance in his background, he is usually snagged up because he is competing against other males with little or no dance exp. Women on the other hand, are often competing against peers with years of experience.
In programming, I think women programmers, fewer though they may be, are sometimes snagged up because of the assumed better people skills. Does it happen often? Is it right? Who knows....
And if they are terrorists, not only can they challenge Habeaus Corpus in the federal courts, but the government could have them tried in the same courts and punished if found guilty on evidence. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would love to sit on some of those juries. I would.
Trial by jury was seen as such a foundational right by the founding fathers that it is mentioned in the body of the Constitution itself and not as an amendment. It's there because American juries had an alarming tendency to be very independent of the government of his majesty in the days before independence. From it came the principle that juries can even rule on the law itself and not be challenged. Just Google "Jury Nullification".
But what an opportunity! If they are terrorists and have murdered Americans, let's bring 'em to justice! But if they're there with no evidence to hold 'em and no way of getting out. . . guess who's going to get a lot more egg in their face?
JC: "Who do You think the princes of this World tax? Their children? Or someone else's children?"
You'd better disappear. A T-1000 will be coming by your place later today. Other than an intimidating figure at your door and an, "Are you 'elrous0'?", you won't receive any more warning. You might get lucky if it says, "Come with me if you want to live", but there's no guarantee. Hurry!
Interestingly, I worked for the US Forest Service from the late eighties to late nineties. At the time, much of the research on DDT was stored at our office. One of the guys who had been around at the time, told me that the research really heated up after the initial media coverage and the book "Silent Spring". What they learned was that the chemical DDT itself, was safer than expected and did not cause the bird eggs to have thin shells. The actual danger came from additives and impurities from its manufacture. Now I'm not saying we should start using DDT again in the US - fixing the formulation does not change the fact that the chemical itself is very long lasting - another issue. But it is worth noting that after the true cause was determined several years later, it was no longer news and few people ever heard about it. I suppose that's one reason that Africa embraced it seeing the formulation was now better.
I mostly agree - But wonder if another part of this will end out allowing Greater Penetration of the Internet public networks even as it limits access to the government ones. After all, if you have rights and abilities to break into networks in the public domain but never have to be concerned about the public breaking into yours, do as you wish. . . life is good! And no one will ever find out what you're doing.
If they really cared about doing it right, it wouldn't always be a one-sided standard protecting only government privacy. IMHO, they should also be pushing for internet privacy laws and security while going for the Federal Network.
Of course, if the guys in the van mentioned the mistake when they came in that day, but the guys downloading the data didn't bother to correct it, who's fault is it then?
In the end, sueing Google is proably the only way to get the stuff researched in order to find out who did (or didn't) do what.
Like you say, a lot of the Windows drivers were broken. And there's no good excuse to not provide working drivers for a product. Sure, Microsoft made a lot of last minute changes with Vista that messed up a lot of drivers, but Creative should have been able to beat Daniel K to the punch in fixing their own drivers.
Now that I've said that, there is one bit from the blog further down the line that brings up a good point in Creative's favor:
I firmly believe that Daniel K has caught the flack because of the Dolby Digital feature As far as I am aware Auzentech paid a lot of money for an exclusive licence with Dolby to have their cards support this. Now, Creative would get into trouble if they allow a means for this to be "cracked" to run on non-Auzentech cards.
Perhaps Auzentech is at the top of the license totem pole with Dolby. And lawsuits, like "other stuff", tends to always go down hill. Creative might be a bit more lenient if they weren't feeling a bit threatened themselves - unless, of course, they're just being lazy jerks.
Sounds great! You should be able to have a script ready within a few days. And since a seed of fear has now been inserted into the collective mindset of the general populace, the likely upsurge in popularity for the movie is almost guaranteed. I suggest a title like, "The Hadron Highway to Hell!". Pretty Catchy, huh?
Of course you will give me a percentage cut for the idea, right? Like I wuddn't want to have to sue you for my intellectual property, ya know.
The Best Disaster movies usually do start with some sort of fear in the public consiousness. What will the title be, I wonder? How about, "The Hadron door to Hell!"?. Yes, that would be good.
Blondes have more fun. But Brunettes remember it the next day.
Yet - if just once, serious infractions of the law like this were treated as what they are, felonies, and the people who did them were put on trial and if found guilty, incarcerated, we would see very little of this for a long time.
They did these things with the assumption that even if they got caught, they could use their connections and insider information to get out of it. It's one of the most common motivations criminals have to commit crime - I won't get caught, but if I do, I won't have to pay for it.
The link doesn't seem to work (for me). But no matter. Like you say, evolution at first seems to explain many things. But when examined in detail, it doesn't provide actual evidence of creatures evolving into totally different species. Evolution within a species is a fact - it's always been observable. But into another Genus - not been seen. I doubt evolution will go away anytime soon. I could call it a religeon, but I'm not sure that would be accurate. It would call it a deeply entrenched scientific tradition. Despite its weaknesses, it's their best "defense" at this point in dealing with the "God Issues". But deeply entrenched traditions, whether religeous or scientific, have a way of causing problems and being inaccurate.
From a Biblical perspective, there is an error in the traditional Creation story. The traditional story says that the earth was created in 7 days. The Bible doesn't say that. It says (KJV) "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep." In the original old aramaic language, there was no form of "to be" verbs like "is" or "was". That invention in language began with the Greeks. In fact, the KJV version puts the word "was" in that verse in italics to show it isn't really there. It was added by translators to make the verse more readable - but it introduced an error. Read it again with the word "became". Now it is something totally different. The world was made perfect, but it became without form and void. Something of a cataclysmic nature happened. The seven days that came after are what happened when God set everything back in order. Suddenly the Bible and ancient fossil records fit together.
Now this bit of information and its ramifications has been around for a while. I didn't think of it myself. You can check on it yourself with any good professor in Hebrew or Aramaic. Unfortunately, though it would explain many things, most Christians I mention it to choose to argue it or ignore it with an attitude of, "What difference does it make?" Yet there is more than one place in scripture where this disasterous occurance is mentioned as well as what caused it.
I'm mentioning the above to you, because as you mentioned, most people keep their minds closed to any option that includes God. Logically, if there is a God. . . then He would have to be pretty familiar with science (obvious) and he ought to be able remember what happened in the beginning. He also has a right to be able to carefully choose his words (ie - "became" not "was"). It's not his fault if a translater makes a mistake in translating those words.
So those are my thoughts after reading your blog. Thanks for writing.
I'd agree it wasn't founded on the Christian Religion of that day. Rather, many of the original colonies were started by settlers who were in Christian sects that were persecuted in Europe. They sailed to escape and carve out for themselves a niche in the New World. Pennsylvania was started by the Quakers, Massachussets by the Puritans, Carolinas by the Presbytyrians, Maryland by Roman Catholics, and so on. When Congress tried to bring these states together, it's no wonder that the idea of keeping church and state separate and having freedom of religeon was agreed to by the states. They may have disagreed on many points but most agreed heartily that persecution based upon beliefs was morally wrong.
Having said that, I don't think you'll find that the original Founding Fathers, their papers or intent would support keeping the Bible out of the school. The founder of Harvard University once said that a person who has not read the Bible is uneducated. Thomas Jefferson merged all four Gospels into a single book with one time line - a study which required some work. So should we should require students to study and believe the Bible in school . . . . NO!!! Wrong place for it!
Separation of Church and state was started by people who knew how important it was partly by having experienced the alternative. And school is the place for knowledge - not persecution or intimidation. It is not the teacher's job to MAKE students believe in evolution or creationism or for that matter what I (or Cowboy Neal) thinks. And in our schools today, there's a fair amount of intimidation, a precursor to persecution. A student should be able to voice their views, even if what they say is in disagreement with most of the others in their class. And a teacher, ought to be able to mention, and even describe, that there are other ideas of how things came about without having fears about their employment. Does that not make sense?
Will give it another shot next week - and I'll try the alternate if there's trouble. But since there is a new version newer than Feisty Fawn out, thought it might be fun to see if it works any better.
Mine has similar issues. It's an HP Pavilion 9000 that won't install Ubuntu. I suspect there's a bad driver or something so I'm having to wait. I've put the errors up on some of the Ubuntu message boards but nothing has worked thus far.
I'm not trying to be a troll, either. I've bought books and would like to try out Ubuntu and see how it works.
Slashdot Mirror
Some of the root causes as to why the banking system flopped and even got into the sub-prime market go back into the nineties. After the great depression, laws were written that were suppposed to protect against it happening again. The first put barriers in place against inter-locking directorates in banks. Banks were no longer permitted to have decision making directors who were also company directors in the investment industry. I forget the exact name of the law. But it was repealed in 1998 I believe. Both parties had to be involved for the vote to carry as the congress had a Republican majority. But the sponsor and a main part of its support was from the Democrat Party. A second law put in place was to protect money in accounts up to $100,000. That was so people didn't rush to get their money out when banks started collapsing. That law was still in effect and worked. So NO, no one would have lost their money, just because a bank went out. Instead, the banks that were smart and stayed out of the sub-prime would have made a killing. Good for them.
Be careful of your thoughts; they could become words and deeds at any minute.
In light of that, I once heard a Senator talking on the radio about what it was like trying to get finances for re-election. At the time, he was no longer running for re-election. To start out, he would start calling various businesses and organizations to ask for donations. One of the first things he would hear would be something like, "What can you do for me?" Or, he would hear, "What can you do TO me?" By the end of day, he said he was pretty burnt out and felt like someones cheap whore (not an exact quote, but it's pretty close).
I had to admit, I didn't like what he said, but I admired hearing some honesty. So that's how it works!
Human Test Volunteer types: "Hey baby, want to Scr__ew?"
Computer Program: "Ouch! You broke my virgin terminal!" - [logs off]
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life. --Winston Churchill
At least this one will get rid of all them thar pirates over there. . . harrrrr!
Good Point. Or maybe the Bush Admin Dept. of Justice would like to save the power and time for something else.
Funny thing is, lignite is almost pure Carbon. Burning it with Oxygen produces energy. If we split the resulting CO2 back into C and O2, our energy surplus turns into an energy deficit and gives us what we started with. Only we went to a lot of trouble for nothing. But what is really accomplished by storing it under the earth? Plants Do need CO2. Why not give them some extra CO2 and they may work more efficiently to produce growth and give off more oxygen. Has anyone ever really tested this?
Global Warming - A new and improved version of Global Cooling.
Errrr.... that is, Reading about that escape was interesting and Rio is a beautiful place to live for some people.
Snatched up is good.
And sometimes it works in reverse. If you find a male in theater who actually has dance in his background, he is usually snagged up because he is competing against other males with little or no dance exp. Women on the other hand, are often competing against peers with years of experience.
In programming, I think women programmers, fewer though they may be, are sometimes snagged up because of the assumed better people skills. Does it happen often? Is it right? Who knows....
And if they are terrorists, not only can they challenge Habeaus Corpus in the federal courts, but the government could have them tried in the same courts and punished if found guilty on evidence. I'm sure there are a lot of people who would love to sit on some of those juries. I would.
Trial by jury was seen as such a foundational right by the founding fathers that it is mentioned in the body of the Constitution itself and not as an amendment. It's there because American juries had an alarming tendency to be very independent of the government of his majesty in the days before independence. From it came the principle that juries can even rule on the law itself and not be challenged. Just Google "Jury Nullification".
But what an opportunity! If they are terrorists and have murdered Americans, let's bring 'em to justice! But if they're there with no evidence to hold 'em and no way of getting out. . . guess who's going to get a lot more egg in their face?
JC: "Who do You think the princes of this World tax? Their children? Or someone else's children?"
Peter: "Someone else's children."
JC: "Thou has rightly answered"
As long as space tourists don't wear metal belt buckles, everything should be all right. If not, What the! Ouch! Whooaahh!
As long as tourists don't wear metal belt buckles at nearest approach, everything should be all right. If not, Whooaa!
You'd better disappear. A T-1000 will be coming by your place later today. Other than an intimidating figure at your door and an, "Are you 'elrous0'?", you won't receive any more warning. You might get lucky if it says, "Come with me if you want to live", but there's no guarantee. Hurry!
Interestingly, I worked for the US Forest Service from the late eighties to late nineties. At the time, much of the research on DDT was stored at our office. One of the guys who had been around at the time, told me that the research really heated up after the initial media coverage and the book "Silent Spring". What they learned was that the chemical DDT itself, was safer than expected and did not cause the bird eggs to have thin shells. The actual danger came from additives and impurities from its manufacture. Now I'm not saying we should start using DDT again in the US - fixing the formulation does not change the fact that the chemical itself is very long lasting - another issue. But it is worth noting that after the true cause was determined several years later, it was no longer news and few people ever heard about it. I suppose that's one reason that Africa embraced it seeing the formulation was now better.
I mostly agree - But wonder if another part of this will end out allowing Greater Penetration of the Internet public networks even as it limits access to the government ones. After all, if you have rights and abilities to break into networks in the public domain but never have to be concerned about the public breaking into yours, do as you wish. . . life is good! And no one will ever find out what you're doing.
If they really cared about doing it right, it wouldn't always be a one-sided standard protecting only government privacy. IMHO, they should also be pushing for internet privacy laws and security while going for the Federal Network.
Guess we'll know more as more comes out. .
My sigOf course, if the guys in the van mentioned the mistake when they came in that day, but the guys downloading the data didn't bother to correct it, who's fault is it then?
In the end, sueing Google is proably the only way to get the stuff researched in order to find out who did (or didn't) do what.
Like you say, a lot of the Windows drivers were broken. And there's no good excuse to not provide working drivers for a product. Sure, Microsoft made a lot of last minute changes with Vista that messed up a lot of drivers, but Creative should have been able to beat Daniel K to the punch in fixing their own drivers.
Now that I've said that, there is one bit from the blog further down the line that brings up a good point in Creative's favor:
I firmly believe that Daniel K has caught the flack because of the Dolby Digital feature As far as I am aware Auzentech paid a lot of money for an exclusive licence with Dolby to have their cards support this. Now, Creative would get into trouble if they allow a means for this to be "cracked" to run on non-Auzentech cards.
Perhaps Auzentech is at the top of the license totem pole with Dolby. And lawsuits, like "other stuff", tends to always go down hill. Creative might be a bit more lenient if they weren't feeling a bit threatened themselves - unless, of course, they're just being lazy jerks.
My sig is OK
Sounds great! You should be able to have a script ready within a few days. And since a seed of fear has now been inserted into the collective mindset of the general populace, the likely upsurge in popularity for the movie is almost guaranteed. I suggest a title like, "The Hadron Highway to Hell!". Pretty Catchy, huh?
Of course you will give me a percentage cut for the idea, right? Like I wuddn't want to have to sue you for my intellectual property, ya know.
The Best Disaster movies usually do start with some sort of fear in the public consiousness. What will the title be, I wonder? How about, "The Hadron door to Hell!"?. Yes, that would be good.
Blondes have more fun. But Brunettes remember it the next day.
Yet - if just once, serious infractions of the law like this were treated as what they are, felonies, and the people who did them were put on trial and if found guilty, incarcerated, we would see very little of this for a long time.
They did these things with the assumption that even if they got caught, they could use their connections and insider information to get out of it. It's one of the most common motivations criminals have to commit crime - I won't get caught, but if I do, I won't have to pay for it.
The link doesn't seem to work (for me). But no matter. Like you say, evolution at first seems to explain many things. But when examined in detail, it doesn't provide actual evidence of creatures evolving into totally different species. Evolution within a species is a fact - it's always been observable. But into another Genus - not been seen. I doubt evolution will go away anytime soon. I could call it a religeon, but I'm not sure that would be accurate. It would call it a deeply entrenched scientific tradition. Despite its weaknesses, it's their best "defense" at this point in dealing with the "God Issues". But deeply entrenched traditions, whether religeous or scientific, have a way of causing problems and being inaccurate.
From a Biblical perspective, there is an error in the traditional Creation story. The traditional story says that the earth was created in 7 days. The Bible doesn't say that. It says (KJV) "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. And the earth was without form and void and darkness was upon the face of the deep." In the original old aramaic language, there was no form of "to be" verbs like "is" or "was". That invention in language began with the Greeks. In fact, the KJV version puts the word "was" in that verse in italics to show it isn't really there. It was added by translators to make the verse more readable - but it introduced an error. Read it again with the word "became". Now it is something totally different. The world was made perfect, but it became without form and void. Something of a cataclysmic nature happened. The seven days that came after are what happened when God set everything back in order. Suddenly the Bible and ancient fossil records fit together.
Now this bit of information and its ramifications has been around for a while. I didn't think of it myself. You can check on it yourself with any good professor in Hebrew or Aramaic. Unfortunately, though it would explain many things, most Christians I mention it to choose to argue it or ignore it with an attitude of, "What difference does it make?" Yet there is more than one place in scripture where this disasterous occurance is mentioned as well as what caused it.
I'm mentioning the above to you, because as you mentioned, most people keep their minds closed to any option that includes God. Logically, if there is a God. . . then He would have to be pretty familiar with science (obvious) and he ought to be able remember what happened in the beginning. He also has a right to be able to carefully choose his words (ie - "became" not "was"). It's not his fault if a translater makes a mistake in translating those words.
So those are my thoughts after reading your blog. Thanks for writing.
Having said that, I don't think you'll find that the original Founding Fathers, their papers or intent would support keeping the Bible out of the school. The founder of Harvard University once said that a person who has not read the Bible is uneducated. Thomas Jefferson merged all four Gospels into a single book with one time line - a study which required some work. So should we should require students to study and believe the Bible in school . . . . NO!!! Wrong place for it!
Separation of Church and state was started by people who knew how important it was partly by having experienced the alternative. And school is the place for knowledge - not persecution or intimidation. It is not the teacher's job to MAKE students believe in evolution or creationism or for that matter what I (or Cowboy Neal) thinks. And in our schools today, there's a fair amount of intimidation, a precursor to persecution. A student should be able to voice their views, even if what they say is in disagreement with most of the others in their class. And a teacher, ought to be able to mention, and even describe, that there are other ideas of how things came about without having fears about their employment. Does that not make sense?
My Sig
Will give it another shot next week - and I'll try the alternate if there's trouble. But since there is a new version newer than Feisty Fawn out, thought it might be fun to see if it works any better.
I'm not trying to be a troll, either. I've bought books and would like to try out Ubuntu and see how it works.