I don't know what you mean by that. Perhaps you could put it in layman's terms. If you mean something as simple as watching a video in realtime, YouTube came out in 2005.
Except that didn't happen in the decade and more before net neutrality came into play. The idea that ISPs will be able to turn the Internet into cable TV is absurd. You would quickly lose your customers.
Mostly true, but building out infrastructure is a very high barrier to entry. Also, depending where you are, quality of service can differ greatly between carriers.
This is coming to ISP service too, with the end of net neutrality. Comcast and Verizon will make it impossible to tell whether Xfinity or Fios is a better deal.
What does net neutrality have to do with that? By the way, net neutrality was introduced by Obama rather late in the game (2015). So whatever it is that you imagined the ISPs doing, they could have done it before.
Note that the large majority of terrorists in the USA are Christian
You state that without any evidence. Where in your Wikipedia link does it say that? You just assume it. For example, from your link:
"According to the FBI in June 2008, eco-terrorists and extreme animal rights activists represent "one of the most serious domestic terrorism threats in the U.S. today." "
Are they Christian? Do they cite Christian teachings when they commit their acts? What Christian doctrine are they following?
And since we're talking about numbers, why don't you compare the per capita body count of explicitly Christian terrorist acts in the US versus Muslim in the US? Perhaps you'd like to start counting from after 9/11? Give it a go.
And don't stop in the US. Why are there Muslim insurgent groups all around the world? You don't see anything comparable in Christianity. You can find a few, but nowhere near the scope of Islam. It's the Christians who are bearing the brunt of persecution in Muslim lands.
The Islamic extremism we see reported in the media has its roots in Saudi Arabia and is a sect of Islam called Wahhabism, which practices Salafism.
That's not the only source of Islamic "extremism". Look at, for example, the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood. What you lack is an informed and honest look at the doctrines and history of Islam.
Christianity: Jesus was a hippie that preached love, pacifism, and virtue.
Islam: Mohamed was a conquering warlord that preached supremacy through violence.
Christian history: Meek cult, gets adopted by the Roman empire. Scripture does not support wars to spread Christianity -- exactly the opposite. Crusades were a delayed response to centuries of Muslim conquests of Christian land.
Muslim history: Warrior cult conquers all of Arabia. Continues to spread by the sword out from there, all the way into Europe before getting pushed back. Eventually the Ottoman empire falls as Europe regains military supremacy.
The Muslims "extremists" today who fight for Islamic supremacy do so via an explicit central message within Islam, based on scripture, tradition, and history.
The fundamental trade issue between the US and China on is _not_ tariffs.
It's part of it, and only in your Land of Denial do you think getting tariffs on cars reduced from 25% to 15% isn't a positive result.
Instead it's China's routine use of state interference
Then you should be glad to know that Trump is concerned with the overall balance of trade, and not just tariffs, and has complained about those other things too.
But who are we kidding? You have Trump Derangement Syndrome, and aren't interested in giving Trump credit for anything.
I'm going to call you Obama Economy Matt, for being so out of touch with current economics. The economy has improved a lot since it cratered in 2008. Educate yourself.
For bigger supermarket visits you can buy a proper bag that will last years.
You have to use that bag over a 100 times to make up for the costs of producing it versus plastic bags. And of course you have to clean it, and it won't serve secondary uses such as picking up dog poop. And people will inevitably forget or buy new reusable bags at a rate that ends costing more in the long run.
There, there. Don't strain yourself now. By checking up on facts for example.
You obviously didn't strain yourself in your "fact" checking, because you haven't refuted my main point: that Trump got China, North Korea's "umbrella", to enact meaningful sanctions. You can point to the distant past all you want, but we're talking about the difference between this President and the last.
Much as I'd like to hear that Dirty Donald had actually scored a major win against North Korea, I'm skeptical about the extent to which North Korea will actually, well, get rid of its nukes.
Yes, so am I. But the current position is better than North Korea blatantly testing long range missiles designed to strike the US along with continued nuclear testing.
And you might also note that China hasn't given an inch on the North Korea issue before it was made to lose face when North Korea actually exploded a nuke.
Perhaps you can "fact check" if North Korea had exploded nukes before.
Twisting arms is something Dirty Donald might be able to do against small building contractors, but it doesn't seem to be getting him (and more importantly: the US) any results on the world stage.
It deserves to be brushed off. It's not real. Notice how you had 4 easily accesible links for your first claim and zero for that second one?
I don't know what you're talking about. If, by "second claim", you mean, "the real "rape culture" being imported into Europe and other Western countries", that was supported by the, "4 easily accesible links". I'm responding to a post about "imaginary brown people". Were 1,500 women sexually assaulted, in public by gangs of men, during New Year's Eve in Cologne by "imaginary brown people"?
I've told you this before, you're nothing more than a standard, run of the mill racist.
Have you? How would I know? You're just a typical Anonymous Coward, talking from the shadows, making stupid arguments, and calling me "racist".
So... call me crazy, but I'd imagine that pretty much anyone with a masters degree in some form of math should be able to act as an expert witness to simply say that this is a discovery and not an invention and therefore is not patentable.
The "discovered" versus "invented" is an old, philosophical debate in math. It's also true that pretty much anything in computing can be described in mathematical terms. Using this as your litmus test is bunk.
That said, I think patents in software have done far more harm than good, and the world would be better off if we removed legal monopolies on ideas within the software industry.
Also blue states, on average, produce more private sector jobs and have more GDP per capita.
You're mixing up the cart with the horse. Look at how "blue" California is being run into the ground, and Californians are fleeing to places like Texas. Of course, they still vote "blue", so they're going to ruin Texas just like they did California.
Trump certainly has turned the US into a laughing stock in the eyes of the world.
Right. That's why China went along with Trump and enacted meaningful sanctions on North Korea.
What a laughing stock, he didn't let the rest of the world walk all over the US in a futile climate agreement.
What a laughing stock, he doesn't think the US should be a dumping ground for shithole migrants. Proud Europe, and honorary European nation Canada, instead will be the dumping ground! Humanitarian superpowers! So much enrichment!
That cash was Iran's not the US's. It was the release of Iranian assets that the US had seized.
Well that's a one-sided summary. Here are some more details:
"Obama's administration came under scrutiny last week after details emerged about a $400 million cash payment made to Iran on the same day the country released a handful of American hostages. The administration insists the payment -- part of a separate decades-old settlement for an arms deal -- was negotiated separately from the talks on releasing the prisoners.
The payment was acknowledged by the President and reported upon in January, but new information about the manner of delivery -- including wooden palettes of cash being unloaded from a military plane in Tehran -- triggered accusations the US had paid ransom money for captive Americans."
China, the provider of North Korea's military umbrella, has fought the US to a stalemate in Korea before. And it has only gotten stronger since then. Much stronger. It has kept North Korea in the saddle militarily, politically, and economically... and there's nothing the US could have done about that.
That's a flat-out lie, because as Trump showed, the US had leverage with China that it was too afraid to use. It was Trump that succeeded in getting China to get tough on sanctions.
Granted, some arm-twisting can sometimes go a long way. But only competent arm-twisting. Not the incoherent verbiage coming out of the WH now.
Funny, because here you realize Trump actually succeeded with arm-twisting, but then seek to immediately discredit it. Let's get real: Obama was a doormat when it came to foreign affairs.
Do you know why the news isn't constantly talking about the war in Libya? BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE.
Right. We overthrew the dictator, got our embassy destroyed and people murdered with bad security, and washed our hands of the country. Libya became part of the operating region for the newly reinvigorated Islamists, in the name of ISIS.
You think Romney or McCain wouldn't have put 150,000 boots on the ground? How's that Iraqi and Afghanistan war going for ya?
Bush and Rumsfeld was criticized for trying to do Afghanistan on the cheap. Obama increased troops into Afghanistan.
Democrats, of this decade anyway, are not warmongers no matter how much you stretch your equivocations.
Which candidate was pushing for more involvement in Syria, in potential conflict with Russia? Oh, that's right, it was Clinton.
For something as critical as dairy, it seems an unacceptable risk to rely on a foreign country to meet your quota. What if there was some sort of depression or natural disaster.. do you not think the US would limit dairy exports to provide for their own people first?
The same can be said for a vast array of commodities that a modern nation depends on. Trump started this trade war with steel tariffs to keep the US steel industry alive. And why stop there? US manufacturing has been decimated, with virtually anything you can buy being produced overseas. It's benefited the US consumer in the short-term, but how long can this continue?
There's this feeling I get when I get the notification to a reply in a contentious debate. Will they destroy my argument? Will I have to rethink my position? As I got that feeling, I quickly decided it was unlikely you'd have anything substantive to say. I was right.
You're just as intolerant as the people depicted in whichever white supremacist garbage that you read. Why shouldn't people treat you in the same way that you propose to treat them?
Pardon me, but you're the one that said, "we should be intolerant of intolerance". My stance is simple: limit immigration from intolerant societies. You haven't explained why I'm wrong.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what you mean by that. Perhaps you could put it in layman's terms. If you mean something as simple as watching a video in realtime, YouTube came out in 2005.
Except that didn't happen in the decade and more before net neutrality came into play. The idea that ISPs will be able to turn the Internet into cable TV is absurd. You would quickly lose your customers.
Telecommunication bandwith is a commodity.
Mostly true, but building out infrastructure is a very high barrier to entry. Also, depending where you are, quality of service can differ greatly between carriers.
This is coming to ISP service too, with the end of net neutrality. Comcast and Verizon will make it impossible to tell whether Xfinity or Fios is a better deal.
What does net neutrality have to do with that? By the way, net neutrality was introduced by Obama rather late in the game (2015). So whatever it is that you imagined the ISPs doing, they could have done it before.
Note that the large majority of terrorists in the USA are Christian
You state that without any evidence. Where in your Wikipedia link does it say that? You just assume it. For example, from your link:
"According to the FBI in June 2008, eco-terrorists and extreme animal rights activists represent "one of the most serious domestic terrorism threats in the U.S. today." "
Are they Christian? Do they cite Christian teachings when they commit their acts? What Christian doctrine are they following?
And since we're talking about numbers, why don't you compare the per capita body count of explicitly Christian terrorist acts in the US versus Muslim in the US? Perhaps you'd like to start counting from after 9/11? Give it a go.
And don't stop in the US. Why are there Muslim insurgent groups all around the world? You don't see anything comparable in Christianity. You can find a few, but nowhere near the scope of Islam. It's the Christians who are bearing the brunt of persecution in Muslim lands.
The Islamic extremism we see reported in the media has its roots in Saudi Arabia and is a sect of Islam called Wahhabism, which practices Salafism.
That's not the only source of Islamic "extremism". Look at, for example, the formation of the Muslim Brotherhood. What you lack is an informed and honest look at the doctrines and history of Islam.
Christianity: Jesus was a hippie that preached love, pacifism, and virtue.
Islam: Mohamed was a conquering warlord that preached supremacy through violence.
Christian history: Meek cult, gets adopted by the Roman empire. Scripture does not support wars to spread Christianity -- exactly the opposite. Crusades were a delayed response to centuries of Muslim conquests of Christian land.
Muslim history: Warrior cult conquers all of Arabia. Continues to spread by the sword out from there, all the way into Europe before getting pushed back. Eventually the Ottoman empire falls as Europe regains military supremacy.
The Muslims "extremists" today who fight for Islamic supremacy do so via an explicit central message within Islam, based on scripture, tradition, and history.
In the mean time he has spent his powder, and this is all he got for it in return. Surely you understand that?
Surely you understand trade issue with China is still in play? No, you do not, because you are in Denial Land.
Like TPP
The devil is in the details. Signing a bad deal to try and get a better deal with China doesn't make sense.
The fundamental trade issue between the US and China on is _not_ tariffs.
It's part of it, and only in your Land of Denial do you think getting tariffs on cars reduced from 25% to 15% isn't a positive result.
Instead it's China's routine use of state interference
Then you should be glad to know that Trump is concerned with the overall balance of trade, and not just tariffs, and has complained about those other things too.
But who are we kidding? You have Trump Derangement Syndrome, and aren't interested in giving Trump credit for anything.
That's why the Old Economy Steve's are asshats
I'm going to call you Obama Economy Matt, for being so out of touch with current economics. The economy has improved a lot since it cratered in 2008. Educate yourself.
But c'mon, plastic bags!!!
I hear they suffocate you in your sleep. Will no one save us from this plastic bag menace?
[Paper bags are] quite common in some places and for smaller loads work fine.
There's an environmental cost to paper, too.
For bigger supermarket visits you can buy a proper bag that will last years.
You have to use that bag over a 100 times to make up for the costs of producing it versus plastic bags. And of course you have to clean it, and it won't serve secondary uses such as picking up dog poop. And people will inevitably forget or buy new reusable bags at a rate that ends costing more in the long run.
It's only rational if you're actually "saving the Earth".
Certified compostable bags that can go in my green bin, to divert all of that kitty litter from landfills.
Composting cat litter is not a good idea.
There, there. Don't strain yourself now. By checking up on facts for example.
You obviously didn't strain yourself in your "fact" checking, because you haven't refuted my main point: that Trump got China, North Korea's "umbrella", to enact meaningful sanctions. You can point to the distant past all you want, but we're talking about the difference between this President and the last.
Much as I'd like to hear that Dirty Donald had actually scored a major win against North Korea, I'm skeptical about the extent to which North Korea will actually, well, get rid of its nukes.
Yes, so am I. But the current position is better than North Korea blatantly testing long range missiles designed to strike the US along with continued nuclear testing.
And you might also note that China hasn't given an inch on the North Korea issue before it was made to lose face when North Korea actually exploded a nuke.
Perhaps you can "fact check" if North Korea had exploded nukes before.
Twisting arms is something Dirty Donald might be able to do against small building contractors, but it doesn't seem to be getting him (and more importantly: the US) any results on the world stage.
Oh really?
It deserves to be brushed off. It's not real. Notice how you had 4 easily accesible links for your first claim and zero for that second one?
I don't know what you're talking about. If, by "second claim", you mean, "the real "rape culture" being imported into Europe and other Western countries", that was supported by the, "4 easily accesible links". I'm responding to a post about "imaginary brown people". Were 1,500 women sexually assaulted, in public by gangs of men, during New Year's Eve in Cologne by "imaginary brown people"?
I've told you this before, you're nothing more than a standard, run of the mill racist.
Have you? How would I know? You're just a typical Anonymous Coward, talking from the shadows, making stupid arguments, and calling me "racist".
How do you manage to keep safe from these imaginary brown people??
He's probably not a woman, and doesn't attend concerts, swimming pools, jogging, or New Year's Eve celebrations.
You poor snowflake!
How brave of you to brush under the rug the real "rape culture" being imported into Europe and other Western countries.
So... call me crazy, but I'd imagine that pretty much anyone with a masters degree in some form of math should be able to act as an expert witness to simply say that this is a discovery and not an invention and therefore is not patentable.
The "discovered" versus "invented" is an old, philosophical debate in math. It's also true that pretty much anything in computing can be described in mathematical terms. Using this as your litmus test is bunk.
That said, I think patents in software have done far more harm than good, and the world would be better off if we removed legal monopolies on ideas within the software industry.
Also blue states, on average, produce more private sector jobs and have more GDP per capita.
You're mixing up the cart with the horse. Look at how "blue" California is being run into the ground, and Californians are fleeing to places like Texas. Of course, they still vote "blue", so they're going to ruin Texas just like they did California.
Trump certainly has turned the US into a laughing stock in the eyes of the world.
Right. That's why China went along with Trump and enacted meaningful sanctions on North Korea.
What a laughing stock, he didn't let the rest of the world walk all over the US in a futile climate agreement.
What a laughing stock, he doesn't think the US should be a dumping ground for shithole migrants. Proud Europe, and honorary European nation Canada, instead will be the dumping ground! Humanitarian superpowers! So much enrichment!
That cash was Iran's not the US's. It was the release of Iranian assets that the US had seized.
Well that's a one-sided summary. Here are some more details:
"Obama's administration came under scrutiny last week after details emerged about a $400 million cash payment made to Iran on the same day the country released a handful of American hostages. The administration insists the payment -- part of a separate decades-old settlement for an arms deal -- was negotiated separately from the talks on releasing the prisoners.
The payment was acknowledged by the President and reported upon in January, but new information about the manner of delivery -- including wooden palettes of cash being unloaded from a military plane in Tehran -- triggered accusations the US had paid ransom money for captive Americans."
China, the provider of North Korea's military umbrella, has fought the US to a stalemate in Korea before. And it has only gotten stronger since then. Much stronger. It has kept North Korea in the saddle militarily, politically, and economically ... and there's nothing the US could have done about that.
That's a flat-out lie, because as Trump showed, the US had leverage with China that it was too afraid to use. It was Trump that succeeded in getting China to get tough on sanctions.
Granted, some arm-twisting can sometimes go a long way. But only competent arm-twisting. Not the incoherent verbiage coming out of the WH now.
Funny, because here you realize Trump actually succeeded with arm-twisting, but then seek to immediately discredit it. Let's get real: Obama was a doormat when it came to foreign affairs.
Do you know why the news isn't constantly talking about the war in Libya? BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ONE.
Right. We overthrew the dictator, got our embassy destroyed and people murdered with bad security, and washed our hands of the country. Libya became part of the operating region for the newly reinvigorated Islamists, in the name of ISIS.
You think Romney or McCain wouldn't have put 150,000 boots on the ground? How's that Iraqi and Afghanistan war going for ya?
Bush and Rumsfeld was criticized for trying to do Afghanistan on the cheap. Obama increased troops into Afghanistan.
Democrats, of this decade anyway, are not warmongers no matter how much you stretch your equivocations.
Which candidate was pushing for more involvement in Syria, in potential conflict with Russia? Oh, that's right, it was Clinton.
For something as critical as dairy, it seems an unacceptable risk to rely on a foreign country to meet your quota. What if there was some sort of depression or natural disaster.. do you not think the US would limit dairy exports to provide for their own people first?
The same can be said for a vast array of commodities that a modern nation depends on. Trump started this trade war with steel tariffs to keep the US steel industry alive. And why stop there? US manufacturing has been decimated, with virtually anything you can buy being produced overseas. It's benefited the US consumer in the short-term, but how long can this continue?
Thanks for the conversation. Glad it worked out for you.
I'm surprised she let you have custody of the kids. That was a guaranteed paycheck from you.
You're an ignorant idiot.
There's this feeling I get when I get the notification to a reply in a contentious debate. Will they destroy my argument? Will I have to rethink my position? As I got that feeling, I quickly decided it was unlikely you'd have anything substantive to say. I was right.
You're just as intolerant as the people depicted in whichever white supremacist garbage that you read. Why shouldn't people treat you in the same way that you propose to treat them?
Pardon me, but you're the one that said, "we should be intolerant of intolerance". My stance is simple: limit immigration from intolerant societies. You haven't explained why I'm wrong.
So yeah, for ZFS, better stick to a distro that's maintained, ex. Ubuntu.
You can find absent maintainers for particular projects on any distro.