Dumb to do homework on... Dumb in general considering the expense...
The truth is, the following is all that is required for a first class education.
1. Teacher, knowledgeable in subject, good communication skills. 2. Textbook, high quality, long on information, short on bullshit. 3. Student, appropriately prepared with pencil, paper, eraser, good breakfast optional but recommended. 4. Desk, comfort may vary.
I suspect that's because you don't get pulled over for it.
In my state it is supposedly a ticketable offense to drive in the left lane on multilane highways without intent to pass. So far, I know of only one person who ever got pulled over for it. Same with not using turn signals. Police on traffic patrol always go for the big fish revenue-wise when it comes to ticketing, and that has always been speeding. Pulling people over for presumably lesser revenue offenses means time wasted pursuing the bigger fish.
So pardon me if I treat the results with a little skepticism.
You are also talking about the Gilded Age if you don't know it, at least in reference to what's going on economically now. Noblesse oblige is a concept in which the rich, the tycoons, the aristocrats, the upper 1%'ers gave back to the society from which they took so much, usually in the form of higher wages for their employees or through charitable act to the community at large. This was not so much out of any altruistic sense, but rather the idea that they cannot continue to be affluent if the society at large suffers. The Gilded Age that followed bears a striking resemblance to the "race to the bottom" capitalism that exists now, that somehow there will always be cheaper labor, there will always be shelters from tax, there will always be room for growth, and people should consider themselves lucky that they have a job.
Not surprisingly... the Gilded Age was followed by the Great Depression.
1. Not me 2. Not you 3. Not the guy down the street 4. No one at all 5. Nobody 6. Never in a million years to anyone. 7. Who the fuck comes up with this shit?
Wait... OK, so there's the word trust... and very nearby there is "insurance company". Hmm. It looks like I'm going to have to double up on idiot pills to fit in today.
Windows does precisely this. It tries to hide behind the whole Home vs. Professional vs. Ultimate, but really it's one Windows distribution.
The whole point of multiple distributions is to target different markets and needs. What might be a good idea is to find out where distro overlap occurs and consolidate based on that need, but to get behind one single distribution that "fits all" sounds like a recipe for a piping hot cup of fail.
This is pseudo-philosophical nonsense. The only thing that steps out at me from this article is that we could avoid a lot of mourning if NASA took January off.
The problem with having a "space program", just like any other endeavor, requires an assessment of its value, both long-term and short-term. If these assessments of value indicate worth, we will continue to do it. If they do not, they will be shelved until we can find some previously hidden value.
Rocketeer, schmocketeer. We'd do ourselves well to put that "go where no one's gone before" mentality behind us with its promise of larger-than-life frontier exploration. The only reason an American footprint exists on the moon was because we didn't want our Cold War rivals to leave us behind in technology which might be needed in military applications against them. I love how that's been romanticized into some kind of philosophical manifest destiny.
Only when we stop looking at space travel as something heroic we do once in a while with the pomp and circumstance accorded to the victors in fierce battle will we actually find the reasons for continuing in this endeavor.
The future value of space exploration will come only from a statement of permanence and an eye toward practical concerns.
Space travel must produce scientific and engineering knowledge which increases its own capability, repetition, and safety such that space flight IS something we do every day, and not just every once in a while. Moreover, it comes from having a "next step" always on the must do list, which means that just circling the Earth, something we've known how to do for the entirety of the space program, must soon give way to actual destinations. Permanence. Furthermore, both with science/engineering benefit and possible commercial concerns (profit!), space travel must find a way to pay for itself without relying completely upon a tithe from governments. It will probably ALWAYS need to be funded by governments, big science always does, but it needs to find a way to chip in.
The big gestures like going to the moon help in the marketing of space travel and NASA as a whole, but ultimately there has to be some foundational principle of pragmatism, even in the face of the utopianism of pure science, which ironically allows the utopia its existence. It would be a shame to lose what is a necessary part of our future as a species to a set of well-meaning, yet hopelessly impractical, purist ideals.
See it's the web, right?! So we have 'Web', naturally. Then it's like next-gen stuff, so we go from 2.0 to 3.0. Now, since this is a 3D environment, we replace the decimal point with a D for marketing pizazz.
So we get Web 3D0. Wait. That's a recipe for disaster, isn't it?
The Harkonnens still hate the Atreides, Reverend Mother Gaius (Gaius? Hmm...) Helen Mohiam keeps her gom jabbar close and her pain box closer, CHOAM controls a whole lotta shit, the Spacing Guild refuses rides to people who aren't freer with their spice, and they still make many machines on Ix.
Maybe THIS is the way they intend to bring a passable Dune movie to the screen when everything that has come before is stunningly and embarrassingly opus fail. Call it BSG and get rid of all the internal monologues and the sandworms.
DMCA is not increased government regulation. It is decreased government regulation.
I'll let you reflect on that for a minute.
OK, still confused? Basically the DMCA was a law paid for by the recording industry lobby which gave the industry stronger criminal and civil litigation legs to stand on when pursuing profit. By essentially making an attempt at taking the teeth out of Fair Use doctrine (which would be PROPERLY classified as "increased government regulation" because it limits what the recording industry may derive profit from with respect to the individual and what it may legitimately sue over), it has sued for and received LESS governmental regulation of its own behaviors in both the free market AND in the courtroom.
This is so spin dizzy it belongs as a headline story on Fox News.
Firstly, even if correlation WERE causation, I fail to see how "Web 2.0", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean outside of the boardrooms of envious failing web startups, was in any way assisted by DMCA. The DMCA, in result, was an attempt of CURTAILING fair use by more broadly defining infringement in the digital arena and calling into litigious question those things previously covered by fair use doctrines, such as transfer of media from one format to another for personal use.
If anything, Web 2.0 succeeded largely BECAUSE of fair use. DMCA is to the digital arena what concerns against VCRs and DAT was in the early '80s, only the DMCA actually passed while the concerns about the VCR were settled through interpretations of the fair use doctrine. So Web 2.0 is successful DESPITE the DMCA? Oh, the notification and withdrawal of infringing material may have allowed ISPs to breathe a little easier, but a few infringement cases upholding fair use could have just as easily codified this without all of the excess baggage that has led to the development of DRM and emboldened the MPAA and RIAA to take 12-year-olds to court for downloading shitty My Chemical Romance mp3s.
The fact is that DMCA was the favored child of the recording industry lobby, period. That fair use has to be held up and litigated BECAUSE of DMCA is a travesty, not a saving grace.
This is the easy stuff. All the major hurdles to this task are already behind it. Breaking the sound barrier in a ground-based vehicle is really the only tough part.
Doing this advances nothing, says nothing, except that there might be a thrill-seeking idiot out there willing to roll the dice for walking away from the event alive. And of course there is some dopamine-starved person out there who WILL do it. This we know already.
This isn't at all amazing unless you are easily amazed.
If you think this is cool, I once pooped out a three-foot perfect coil of shit-rope. I was hesitant to flush it because it was just so... so... amazing.
Talk about amazing feats... I've tolerated the incessant yammerings of the easily amused, vapidly motivated, sub-human droolers and mouth breathers around me without going fully off the pier. Now, THAT'S fucking amazing. I should be clinically insane by now, and so should I.
...dimestore opinion hack who just doesn't really understand... well, anything really, and has apparently subscribed to the Trend Du Jour, using pseudointellectual "truthiness" to as a prognostication and analysis tool.
The gaping hole in this one?
If anything he were saying in his pop-psychological ramblings were true, why would this behavior need an "economic downturn" to show itself? Hmm? Wouldn't it be more logical to assume that if people felt like they could make money off of this at any point in the past that we would ALREADY be hip-deep in Interwebbitube Profiteerism (TM) by now? Why would, say Wikipedia, continue to this day to be "open" if people en masse figured out that they wanted to be paid for contributions? Why would it have to be in times of "economic uncertainty" which would be necessary to bring out this incisively revealing psychological phenomenon?
I mean, just because this guy has found a way to profit from being entirely full of shit doesn't mean that everyone else has the same aspirations, does it? It only means that HE needs to be paid to sling his worthless opinion around. As an "entrepreneur", certainly he must have an idea of the motivations of the Internet population, so I'm kind of shocked to see this kind of spew from someone who should really know better.
UK geneticist Steve Jones rumored to be having a tryst with 20-year-old co-ed and former student Jenny Grabowski. Jenny is currently an employee at the local Hooters, having failed out of Oxford.
Oh, and a pre-emptive strike for all of you humorless literalists:
A) There may or may not be a Hooters in the UK. I don't know, and I don't care to look it up.
B) Jenny Grabowski is a fictitious person plucked cleanly out of the ether.
C) For the purposes of this discussion, if there is any cognitive dissonance regarding a person getting into Oxford, taking a class in genetics, and failing out, suffice it to say that she thought she was taking a course to study "jeans", not "genes", and drop/add was over already. The reason why it was over prior to her knowledge is because she had missed the first 9 classes due to oversleeping and generally not giving a shit.
D) For the purposes of this discussion, if there is any cognitive dissonance between a person like this getting into Oxford in the first place, suffice it to say she was a legacy; her mother was world-renowned biochemist Adele Hart-Grabowsky, Oxford alum, graduated summa cum laude.
E) Adele Hart-Grabowsky (nee Adele Hart) married George Philip Grabowski, a fine arts dealer from Richmond, VA in 1987 in a wonderful ceremony on Oahu with 150 friends and relatives in attendance. Their first child, Jennifer Keeley Grabowski, was born in 1988. Keeley was Adele's mother's maiden name.
F) Adele Hart-Grabowsky (nee Adele Hart) and George Philip Grabowski are also fictitious individuals plucked cleanly out of the ether. However, there really is an Oahu and a Richmond, as well as an Oxford University, and as I said before, there actually is a chain of sports-pub style restaurants called Hooters, but it is unclear to me at this time if there is a Hooters in the UK. And based upon probability alone, I'm sure there must have been, at one point, a wedding ceremony in Oahu consisting of approximately 150 friends and relatives that was, indeed, wonderful.
Pair bonding is pretty natural for humans. Marriage is a construct created by religion and borrowed by governments to keep producing new membership for religion or resupplying the labor force. Why do you think most religions look dimly on marriage between people of different religions, and have codified admonitions against divorce? Why do you think married couples get a tax break? Why do you think it has become only a relatively recent development that divorce is not fraught with all of the stigma it used to be, and that children born out of wedlock are no longer considered pariahs? It's all about control by means of incentive, social pressure, and religious admonition to continue the flow of warm bodies into the meat grinder to fill the needs of power.
Slashdot Mirror
Dumb to do homework on...
Dumb in general considering the expense...
The truth is, the following is all that is required for a first class education.
1. Teacher, knowledgeable in subject, good communication skills.
2. Textbook, high quality, long on information, short on bullshit.
3. Student, appropriately prepared with pencil, paper, eraser, good breakfast optional but recommended.
4. Desk, comfort may vary.
Anything else just gets in the way.
...only God must be a little deaf.
They're starting to make theater seats the same dimensions as coach seats.
Is this a meme?
I suspect that's because you don't get pulled over for it.
In my state it is supposedly a ticketable offense to drive in the left lane on multilane highways without intent to pass. So far, I know of only one person who ever got pulled over for it. Same with not using turn signals. Police on traffic patrol always go for the big fish revenue-wise when it comes to ticketing, and that has always been speeding. Pulling people over for presumably lesser revenue offenses means time wasted pursuing the bigger fish.
So pardon me if I treat the results with a little skepticism.
Clear evidence.
I use it to play games off disk, period. Since the BD no longer functions, that's pretty much bricked for me.
You are also talking about the Gilded Age if you don't know it, at least in reference to what's going on economically now. Noblesse oblige is a concept in which the rich, the tycoons, the aristocrats, the upper 1%'ers gave back to the society from which they took so much, usually in the form of higher wages for their employees or through charitable act to the community at large. This was not so much out of any altruistic sense, but rather the idea that they cannot continue to be affluent if the society at large suffers. The Gilded Age that followed bears a striking resemblance to the "race to the bottom" capitalism that exists now, that somehow there will always be cheaper labor, there will always be shelters from tax, there will always be room for growth, and people should consider themselves lucky that they have a job.
Not surprisingly... the Gilded Age was followed by the Great Depression.
It should probably go.
1. Not me
2. Not you
3. Not the guy down the street
4. No one at all
5. Nobody
6. Never in a million years to anyone.
7. Who the fuck comes up with this shit?
Wait... OK, so there's the word trust... and very nearby there is "insurance company". Hmm. It looks like I'm going to have to double up on idiot pills to fit in today.
Windows does precisely this. It tries to hide behind the whole Home vs. Professional vs. Ultimate, but really it's one Windows distribution.
The whole point of multiple distributions is to target different markets and needs. What might be a good idea is to find out where distro overlap occurs and consolidate based on that need, but to get behind one single distribution that "fits all" sounds like a recipe for a piping hot cup of fail.
This is pseudo-philosophical nonsense. The only thing that steps out at me from this article is that we could avoid a lot of mourning if NASA took January off.
The problem with having a "space program", just like any other endeavor, requires an assessment of its value, both long-term and short-term. If these assessments of value indicate worth, we will continue to do it. If they do not, they will be shelved until we can find some previously hidden value.
Rocketeer, schmocketeer. We'd do ourselves well to put that "go where no one's gone before" mentality behind us with its promise of larger-than-life frontier exploration. The only reason an American footprint exists on the moon was because we didn't want our Cold War rivals to leave us behind in technology which might be needed in military applications against them. I love how that's been romanticized into some kind of philosophical manifest destiny.
Only when we stop looking at space travel as something heroic we do once in a while with the pomp and circumstance accorded to the victors in fierce battle will we actually find the reasons for continuing in this endeavor.
The future value of space exploration will come only from a statement of permanence and an eye toward practical concerns.
Space travel must produce scientific and engineering knowledge which increases its own capability, repetition, and safety such that space flight IS something we do every day, and not just every once in a while. Moreover, it comes from having a "next step" always on the must do list, which means that just circling the Earth, something we've known how to do for the entirety of the space program, must soon give way to actual destinations. Permanence. Furthermore, both with science/engineering benefit and possible commercial concerns (profit!), space travel must find a way to pay for itself without relying completely upon a tithe from governments. It will probably ALWAYS need to be funded by governments, big science always does, but it needs to find a way to chip in.
The big gestures like going to the moon help in the marketing of space travel and NASA as a whole, but ultimately there has to be some foundational principle of pragmatism, even in the face of the utopianism of pure science, which ironically allows the utopia its existence. It would be a shame to lose what is a necessary part of our future as a species to a set of well-meaning, yet hopelessly impractical, purist ideals.
See it's the web, right?! So we have 'Web', naturally. Then it's like next-gen stuff, so we go from 2.0 to 3.0. Now, since this is a 3D environment, we replace the decimal point with a D for marketing pizazz.
So we get Web 3D0. Wait. That's a recipe for disaster, isn't it?
Will the avatars of this virtual universe be equally as spherical as their users are likely to become?
Happened it did, embarrassing it was. Search your feelings, young Skywalker... you know it to be true.
*self realization hits*
NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Hey, does anyone know if they dismantled the flight-capable motorcycles that they borrowed out of the CHiPs prop room?
The Harkonnens still hate the Atreides, Reverend Mother Gaius (Gaius? Hmm...) Helen Mohiam keeps her gom jabbar close and her pain box closer, CHOAM controls a whole lotta shit, the Spacing Guild refuses rides to people who aren't freer with their spice, and they still make many machines on Ix.
Maybe THIS is the way they intend to bring a passable Dune movie to the screen when everything that has come before is stunningly and embarrassingly opus fail. Call it BSG and get rid of all the internal monologues and the sandworms.
DMCA is not increased government regulation. It is decreased government regulation.
I'll let you reflect on that for a minute.
OK, still confused? Basically the DMCA was a law paid for by the recording industry lobby which gave the industry stronger criminal and civil litigation legs to stand on when pursuing profit. By essentially making an attempt at taking the teeth out of Fair Use doctrine (which would be PROPERLY classified as "increased government regulation" because it limits what the recording industry may derive profit from with respect to the individual and what it may legitimately sue over), it has sued for and received LESS governmental regulation of its own behaviors in both the free market AND in the courtroom.
This is so spin dizzy it belongs as a headline story on Fox News.
Firstly, even if correlation WERE causation, I fail to see how "Web 2.0", whatever the hell that's supposed to mean outside of the boardrooms of envious failing web startups, was in any way assisted by DMCA. The DMCA, in result, was an attempt of CURTAILING fair use by more broadly defining infringement in the digital arena and calling into litigious question those things previously covered by fair use doctrines, such as transfer of media from one format to another for personal use.
If anything, Web 2.0 succeeded largely BECAUSE of fair use. DMCA is to the digital arena what concerns against VCRs and DAT was in the early '80s, only the DMCA actually passed while the concerns about the VCR were settled through interpretations of the fair use doctrine. So Web 2.0 is successful DESPITE the DMCA? Oh, the notification and withdrawal of infringing material may have allowed ISPs to breathe a little easier, but a few infringement cases upholding fair use could have just as easily codified this without all of the excess baggage that has led to the development of DRM and emboldened the MPAA and RIAA to take 12-year-olds to court for downloading shitty My Chemical Romance mp3s.
The fact is that DMCA was the favored child of the recording industry lobby, period. That fair use has to be held up and litigated BECAUSE of DMCA is a travesty, not a saving grace.
This is the easy stuff. All the major hurdles to this task are already behind it. Breaking the sound barrier in a ground-based vehicle is really the only tough part.
Doing this advances nothing, says nothing, except that there might be a thrill-seeking idiot out there willing to roll the dice for walking away from the event alive. And of course there is some dopamine-starved person out there who WILL do it. This we know already.
This isn't at all amazing unless you are easily amazed.
If you think this is cool, I once pooped out a three-foot perfect coil of shit-rope. I was hesitant to flush it because it was just so... so... amazing.
Talk about amazing feats... I've tolerated the incessant yammerings of the easily amused, vapidly motivated, sub-human droolers and mouth breathers around me without going fully off the pier. Now, THAT'S fucking amazing. I should be clinically insane by now, and so should I.
What'd I just say?
Oh shit.
Pretty messy.
...dimestore opinion hack who just doesn't really understand... well, anything really, and has apparently subscribed to the Trend Du Jour, using pseudointellectual "truthiness" to as a prognostication and analysis tool.
The gaping hole in this one?
If anything he were saying in his pop-psychological ramblings were true, why would this behavior need an "economic downturn" to show itself? Hmm? Wouldn't it be more logical to assume that if people felt like they could make money off of this at any point in the past that we would ALREADY be hip-deep in Interwebbitube Profiteerism (TM) by now? Why would, say Wikipedia, continue to this day to be "open" if people en masse figured out that they wanted to be paid for contributions? Why would it have to be in times of "economic uncertainty" which would be necessary to bring out this incisively revealing psychological phenomenon?
I mean, just because this guy has found a way to profit from being entirely full of shit doesn't mean that everyone else has the same aspirations, does it? It only means that HE needs to be paid to sling his worthless opinion around. As an "entrepreneur", certainly he must have an idea of the motivations of the Internet population, so I'm kind of shocked to see this kind of spew from someone who should really know better.
The popularity of the Miata... sorry... MX-5.
Discuss.
25% of the population are complete idiots.
Two complex sentences in and it is clear.
UK geneticist Steve Jones rumored to be having a tryst with 20-year-old co-ed and former student Jenny Grabowski. Jenny is currently an employee at the local Hooters, having failed out of Oxford.
Oh, and a pre-emptive strike for all of you humorless literalists:
A) There may or may not be a Hooters in the UK. I don't know, and I don't care to look it up.
B) Jenny Grabowski is a fictitious person plucked cleanly out of the ether.
C) For the purposes of this discussion, if there is any cognitive dissonance regarding a person getting into Oxford, taking a class in genetics, and failing out, suffice it to say that she thought she was taking a course to study "jeans", not "genes", and drop/add was over already. The reason why it was over prior to her knowledge is because she had missed the first 9 classes due to oversleeping and generally not giving a shit.
D) For the purposes of this discussion, if there is any cognitive dissonance between a person like this getting into Oxford in the first place, suffice it to say she was a legacy; her mother was world-renowned biochemist Adele Hart-Grabowsky, Oxford alum, graduated summa cum laude.
E) Adele Hart-Grabowsky (nee Adele Hart) married George Philip Grabowski, a fine arts dealer from Richmond, VA in 1987 in a wonderful ceremony on Oahu with 150 friends and relatives in attendance. Their first child, Jennifer Keeley Grabowski, was born in 1988. Keeley was Adele's mother's maiden name.
F) Adele Hart-Grabowsky (nee Adele Hart) and George Philip Grabowski are also fictitious individuals plucked cleanly out of the ether. However, there really is an Oahu and a Richmond, as well as an Oxford University, and as I said before, there actually is a chain of sports-pub style restaurants called Hooters, but it is unclear to me at this time if there is a Hooters in the UK. And based upon probability alone, I'm sure there must have been, at one point, a wedding ceremony in Oahu consisting of approximately 150 friends and relatives that was, indeed, wonderful.
Pair bonding is pretty natural for humans. Marriage is a construct created by religion and borrowed by governments to keep producing new membership for religion or resupplying the labor force. Why do you think most religions look dimly on marriage between people of different religions, and have codified admonitions against divorce? Why do you think married couples get a tax break? Why do you think it has become only a relatively recent development that divorce is not fraught with all of the stigma it used to be, and that children born out of wedlock are no longer considered pariahs? It's all about control by means of incentive, social pressure, and religious admonition to continue the flow of warm bodies into the meat grinder to fill the needs of power.
You know, I'll just call it Fucktothorpe, because getting 3/4 the way past sly innuendo and then turning back just makes me irritable.