There was a civil war going on. We were specifically requested by one side to stick our noses in. Yes we could have opted not to involve ourselves in it at all, but it's hardly a violation of a nation to take sides in a civil war when requested to do so by one of the sides. And ultimately the support we provided was pretty modest mainly serving as an evener to keep the rebels from being shot in droves from the air.
Next thing you'll be telling us that the French shouldn't have aided American revolutionaries when they sought to kick the British out of what would become the USA.
The more costly it is the greater the necessary justification. Supporting rebels trying to overthrow a brutal dictator is really something that we should be doing more of. Especially when it's as cheap as it is. Granted we're still talking about many, many millions of dollars and probably billions of dollars, but ultimately, unlike Iraq, this is a war in which the people will thank us for our help.
As opposed to Afghanistan which could have more effectively been done with cruise missiles given the lackluster attention the administration paid it and Iraq which was a complete mistake from the get go.
As for the war powers act, if the President can't engage in this conflict in the manner that he is, then it's clearly unconstitutional. The war powers act was to prevent another Vietnam conflict, not to prevent the President from being able to exercise his powers as Commander and Chief.
Citation necessary. Using the armed forces to attack is one thing, having a plain clothes operative sneak explosives onto a plane is a completely different matter altogether.
That's more or less precisely it. The rules about what is an isn't appropriate in public ought to be the same regardless of who it is unless there's a damn good reason. And a bunch of prudes and bigots not wanting to see is hardly a valid reason.
At the end of the day for those that find this to be offensive the best way to end the practice is by ensuring that it's not a big deal. But in general I don't think that's going to happen as it's not generally the real problem that they're whining about.
It's a visibility issue. Because we don't have the benefits and drawbacks of being visible by default we're constantly having to bring it up as appropriate in order to remain out. Coming out is a constant process.
When straight people do it, it's just plain obnoxious, since the vast majority of folks are straight, it's mostly a matter of emphasizing what a bigoted jerk one is.
East Coasters are just not as hardy as folks out west. Where we still kill bears with our own hands and posse up to get dangerous outlaws packing 6 guns.
Yeah, I was wondering why this is even news. A 5.8 magnitude earthquake is just not that big of a deal. I always laugh when the East Coast based news outlets make a big deal out of such small earthquakes.
I get letting it be local news, but this is hardly worth talking about on a national level. The discussion that needs to happen is on the East Coast where they think they're impervious to earthquakes, not nationally. The rest of us know better.
Care to provide any citations for that bullshit? Bacteria are small and have a hard time traveling around. Chances are good that they're not going to be able to move the several inches that it would take for that scenario to play out before drying out or dieing.
Your hand, the same one that you use to wipe your ass is also the same one that you use to carry your iPad. Any guesses as to what proportion of the folks that are using those devices in the can are washing their hands between wiping their ass and using their iPad? I don't have numbers, but I'd be surprised if they were anal retentive enough to set the device down, wipe the ass, wash the hands and then pick up the device and leave.
Also, I take it you're not familiar with a nasty bacteria called Escherichia coli 157. It's really hard to treat and fatal in even low concentrations when it makes its way into the blood stream.
Better privacy does that, but anything that does this is going to be limited in scope. It gets really tricky to figure out which ones to allow during a session. Wiping them out when you close the browser does nothing for short term tracking while you serf, but it does limit the long term spying.
Flashblock doesn't work that way, what you need is noscript. The creators of Flashblock specifically state in their FAQ that they don't block LSOs, flash cookies or swf trackers.
The correct fix for that isn't moving to a single window system, it's adding an option to switch between monitors.
And ultimately, even in your case, if you're better off with a single window then you're doing it wrong. Even in the case of those using a tablet, you're still better off under the current system where you can simply just use that second monitor for the second view and keep the tools on the same monitor.
That's not true, having extra bits per channel doesn't expand the dynamic range, it does however give you more values in that range than you would otherwise have. Most of the extra values end up corresponding to things that would be unrecoverable because they're too dark to be registered.
1% can be an awful lot of money left on the table. Corporations that ignore a subset of the market because it's only 1% tend not to do well in the long term.
As well there should be. Having a single window that spans two monitors only works well if both monitors have the same resolution. Otherwise it tends to be somewhat awkward. What's wonderful about the current system is that I can place my tools on one monitor along with a view of the whole image and do my manipulation on the other monitor.
Just as long as they keep the older multi-window mode I don't have any problems with this.
If that's truly the case, then he has no right to be President, anybody looking to be President has to understand that there are certain responsibilities that come with that job. And undergoing experimental medical procedures of this type is a no no.
But at any rate, it doesn't sound like the medical community thinks it was a wise decision to make, which doesn't prove quackery, but it doesn't scream reputable medical advise either.
Not really, the anti-tivoization would make that a challenge. It might be technically possible, but what's the point? The kernel is the part that the locked loaders have to interoperate with.
Sometimes quacks do get it right, but hoping that they'll accidentally get it right is not a good idea. In this case it's a matter of how much evidence do you need to take the risk and at what point is anything better than doing nothing.
Depends where you are. Here in WA there is no legal requirement that you back down in order to exert your right to self defense. And with good reason. Backing down is a definite risk in some situations as is not backing down. I personally had to beat the snot out of more than a few students in school because there was effectively no effort to lock down on bullying.
That being said, fighting is stupid and dangerous and one really ought to find another way out if at all possible. Unfortunately, it's not always possible.
I mostly agree, but you're wrong about expulsion. At some point the behavior becomes sufficiently dangerous and or disruptive that you have to do something. Expulsion is one option, kids that are expelled typically get sent to special schools. It's ultimately not just a matter of that student, you can't allow a handful of bad apples or those that just won't behave screw over the rest of the student population.
But, FWIW, the schools I went to definitely didn't benefit from having folks that were armed or were terrorizing the student population. If you don't deal with those problems and have a full range of remedies you end up with anarchy.
Precisely. There are appropriate uses of police power in schools and there are inappropriate uses. I think having them stay out of fights is a bit over the top, but arresting elementary school students is just absurd.
Personally, I would have loved to have had a police presence at the schools I went to as they were quite violent at times and getting somebody to actually care about that would have been a step in the right direction. But, enforcing petty stuff like that which could more than adequately be handled with an in house suspension seems counterproductive to me.
Except that ICANN has to abide by rulings made by courts in the US. Atari has no obligation to take it to arbitration since there is no licensing deal that mandates arbitration.
Slashdot Mirror
There was a civil war going on. We were specifically requested by one side to stick our noses in. Yes we could have opted not to involve ourselves in it at all, but it's hardly a violation of a nation to take sides in a civil war when requested to do so by one of the sides. And ultimately the support we provided was pretty modest mainly serving as an evener to keep the rebels from being shot in droves from the air.
Next thing you'll be telling us that the French shouldn't have aided American revolutionaries when they sought to kick the British out of what would become the USA.
The more costly it is the greater the necessary justification. Supporting rebels trying to overthrow a brutal dictator is really something that we should be doing more of. Especially when it's as cheap as it is. Granted we're still talking about many, many millions of dollars and probably billions of dollars, but ultimately, unlike Iraq, this is a war in which the people will thank us for our help.
As opposed to Afghanistan which could have more effectively been done with cruise missiles given the lackluster attention the administration paid it and Iraq which was a complete mistake from the get go.
As for the war powers act, if the President can't engage in this conflict in the manner that he is, then it's clearly unconstitutional. The war powers act was to prevent another Vietnam conflict, not to prevent the President from being able to exercise his powers as Commander and Chief.
Citation necessary. Using the armed forces to attack is one thing, having a plain clothes operative sneak explosives onto a plane is a completely different matter altogether.
That's more or less precisely it. The rules about what is an isn't appropriate in public ought to be the same regardless of who it is unless there's a damn good reason. And a bunch of prudes and bigots not wanting to see is hardly a valid reason.
At the end of the day for those that find this to be offensive the best way to end the practice is by ensuring that it's not a big deal. But in general I don't think that's going to happen as it's not generally the real problem that they're whining about.
It's a visibility issue. Because we don't have the benefits and drawbacks of being visible by default we're constantly having to bring it up as appropriate in order to remain out. Coming out is a constant process.
When straight people do it, it's just plain obnoxious, since the vast majority of folks are straight, it's mostly a matter of emphasizing what a bigoted jerk one is.
Indeed that would be a completely different service that would probably end being woken daily by some guy named Bubba.
East Coasters are just not as hardy as folks out west. Where we still kill bears with our own hands and posse up to get dangerous outlaws packing 6 guns.
Yeah, I was wondering why this is even news. A 5.8 magnitude earthquake is just not that big of a deal. I always laugh when the East Coast based news outlets make a big deal out of such small earthquakes.
I get letting it be local news, but this is hardly worth talking about on a national level. The discussion that needs to happen is on the East Coast where they think they're impervious to earthquakes, not nationally. The rest of us know better.
Care to provide any citations for that bullshit? Bacteria are small and have a hard time traveling around. Chances are good that they're not going to be able to move the several inches that it would take for that scenario to play out before drying out or dieing.
Your hand, the same one that you use to wipe your ass is also the same one that you use to carry your iPad. Any guesses as to what proportion of the folks that are using those devices in the can are washing their hands between wiping their ass and using their iPad? I don't have numbers, but I'd be surprised if they were anal retentive enough to set the device down, wipe the ass, wash the hands and then pick up the device and leave.
Also, I take it you're not familiar with a nasty bacteria called Escherichia coli 157. It's really hard to treat and fatal in even low concentrations when it makes its way into the blood stream.
Because you've got huge mounds of cash and nothing better to spend it on than replacement iPads, duh.
Better privacy does that, but anything that does this is going to be limited in scope. It gets really tricky to figure out which ones to allow during a session. Wiping them out when you close the browser does nothing for short term tracking while you serf, but it does limit the long term spying.
Better than nothing, but not good enough.
Flashblock doesn't work that way, what you need is noscript. The creators of Flashblock specifically state in their FAQ that they don't block LSOs, flash cookies or swf trackers.
The correct fix for that isn't moving to a single window system, it's adding an option to switch between monitors.
And ultimately, even in your case, if you're better off with a single window then you're doing it wrong. Even in the case of those using a tablet, you're still better off under the current system where you can simply just use that second monitor for the second view and keep the tools on the same monitor.
That's not true, having extra bits per channel doesn't expand the dynamic range, it does however give you more values in that range than you would otherwise have. Most of the extra values end up corresponding to things that would be unrecoverable because they're too dark to be registered.
There's always Cinepaint. They forked from GIMP 1.04 IIRC and they do support 16bits per channel.
1% can be an awful lot of money left on the table. Corporations that ignore a subset of the market because it's only 1% tend not to do well in the long term.
As well there should be. Having a single window that spans two monitors only works well if both monitors have the same resolution. Otherwise it tends to be somewhat awkward. What's wonderful about the current system is that I can place my tools on one monitor along with a view of the whole image and do my manipulation on the other monitor.
Just as long as they keep the older multi-window mode I don't have any problems with this.
If that's truly the case, then he has no right to be President, anybody looking to be President has to understand that there are certain responsibilities that come with that job. And undergoing experimental medical procedures of this type is a no no.
But at any rate, it doesn't sound like the medical community thinks it was a wise decision to make, which doesn't prove quackery, but it doesn't scream reputable medical advise either.
Not really, the anti-tivoization would make that a challenge. It might be technically possible, but what's the point? The kernel is the part that the locked loaders have to interoperate with.
A broken clock is right two times a day.
Sometimes quacks do get it right, but hoping that they'll accidentally get it right is not a good idea. In this case it's a matter of how much evidence do you need to take the risk and at what point is anything better than doing nothing.
Not if you go to good schools it isn't. I remember quite a few of the mandatory readings were subversive to authority.
Depends where you are. Here in WA there is no legal requirement that you back down in order to exert your right to self defense. And with good reason. Backing down is a definite risk in some situations as is not backing down. I personally had to beat the snot out of more than a few students in school because there was effectively no effort to lock down on bullying.
That being said, fighting is stupid and dangerous and one really ought to find another way out if at all possible. Unfortunately, it's not always possible.
I mostly agree, but you're wrong about expulsion. At some point the behavior becomes sufficiently dangerous and or disruptive that you have to do something. Expulsion is one option, kids that are expelled typically get sent to special schools. It's ultimately not just a matter of that student, you can't allow a handful of bad apples or those that just won't behave screw over the rest of the student population.
But, FWIW, the schools I went to definitely didn't benefit from having folks that were armed or were terrorizing the student population. If you don't deal with those problems and have a full range of remedies you end up with anarchy.
Precisely. There are appropriate uses of police power in schools and there are inappropriate uses. I think having them stay out of fights is a bit over the top, but arresting elementary school students is just absurd.
Personally, I would have loved to have had a police presence at the schools I went to as they were quite violent at times and getting somebody to actually care about that would have been a step in the right direction. But, enforcing petty stuff like that which could more than adequately be handled with an in house suspension seems counterproductive to me.
Except that ICANN has to abide by rulings made by courts in the US. Atari has no obligation to take it to arbitration since there is no licensing deal that mandates arbitration.