Most likely because not everyone is an author or has any interest in being one. I Have done a few amazing things in my life over the years, not to the level of going to space, but even if I did I wouldnt write a book about it either.
My point was not that MYSQL was not supported but rather that it was forked to create MARIADB after ORACLE bought SUN. (not sure why I am being modded down people here should know that was what I meant)
tell that to the 240 maimed or hurt, sure you dont have your legs, but hey only a handful of people would have been hurt instead of a buttload, but you might be dead!
You went out of your way to say violent crime, you were intentionally misleading about your statistics. thats the great thing about statistics, they can say whatever you want them to depending on your personal views.
I used that because it sounded rediculous, I was not going to go looking for something specific. However you make a good point in this. Anything that is cut or changed will make someone upset.
well technically yes. I am sure that some other pissed off people out there will fork the revision and continue support for the version that is officially no longer supported. you see it happen all the time for example mySQL - MARIADB
and to be fair, the link you cited spoke of murder, however you kept using the term violent crime. Those numbers vary differently. murder is not really the important meteric to me personally, violent crime is. the fact remains I am far more likely to be hit by lightning than murdered by another human in the USA. violent crime I have a way higher chance of becoming a victim to compared to being murdered.
but again even if it were not, it just shows that if you take away the guns, you can still buy a crockpot. or are you claiming the boston bombing did not happen??
There are other factors and I am only using our country and our values as a bassis. You look in places in america that have open carry, you dont have as much violent crime as you do in places where you cannot have a gun. that is a fact in america.
Mexico kind of proves my point, hardcore strict gun laws, yet a very high violent crime rate (we can argue that the drug war contributes to the high gun rate as well)
you make a good point, and I did see that as well. quite simply one is much more neutral than the prior while there is still slant. One is more of a make you think question. while the other is nothing but loaded.
Here in NY anyway there is a company who installs and maintains solar panels on your own home, however you dont own them, you are now feeding into the power grid, but you are still paying the same (or slightly lower) than before. saving the upfront high costs. I know one family who has done it and so far it seems to be a good plan. If there was a "rent to own" feature in the contract of the panels I would be more willing to go along with this particular model. Sorry for the off topic rant
But for one prime example on how gunfree zones will not stop murder, even if we got rid of guns completely. take boston. it is a gun free city, and yet there are over 240 people injured in a matter of seconds, far quicker than what it took for the gunman in conn to take out a classroom. I am sure there are other examples on how gun control does not stop criminals
gun free zones do not stop murder from happening. In places where there is strict anti gun laws, the crime rates are higher then in places without anti gun laws
almost ever mass murder by gunman has taken place in gun free zones. I mean if you wanted to debate vortex thats one thing, but with the way you speak to people "lower than you" (since you are a scientist and all) make it not even worth it.
Grassroots conservatives really dont care about a lot of issues that the liberals claim that are for/against. I would wager it is safe to say the same for the way conservatives feel towards liberals ideas. I know a good portion of both and lean libertarian myself, Plain and simple the fringe is what is spoken about by both sides. If we asked neutral questions instead of loaded questions like the media (both fox and msnbc) we would be better off. Instead of asking "if we invest X into solar by raising taxes on Y (oil) is that good for the country?" how about we simply ask "would you switch over to solar if the cost was close to the same as you pay for energy today?"
do you see how one turns into a fight and the other does not?
I could point out that some research on both sides are utterly crap. funding the study of beetles migration habits? yeah I dont think we need to waste money on that one
the FBI's general counsel. 'We don't have the ability to go to court and say, "We need a court order to effectuate the intercept." Other countries have that.'
Last time I checked, that was always a selling point of this country
but to be clear, cutting the other 50%, frees the money up for the states, hopefully they dont ake it all, or more, but they can and should use some of the freed up money
if we did that in conjunction with everything else that the states do, or could do better, it would be even sooner. but yes, dropping military spending by somewhere over 50% would make me happy, but i also want to cut some 50% of the democrats stuff as well personally.
the point was the music our parents bought through Itunes in the beginning.. but are still listening to them. I understand just as well as you how trivial it is. but for a non technical person, its still jumping through hoops.
the issue is not "covering the expense" it is deciding which expenses need to be cut. Our economy brings in more in each year then we spent per year only a decades ago. there is no excuse that spending levels have gone up to trillion dollar deficits when we still take in more money than only a decade ago. Let me ask you something. has anything gotten better for the rising taxes and government spending? Some will argue for others against of course. I argue that we dont get nearly as much for what our government spends vs 10 years ago. Even if we got the exact same that we got 10 years ago from our tax money, there is no reason for spending to have gone up.
somewhere along the line the federal government forgot all about the 10th amendment.
Slashdot Mirror
Most likely because not everyone is an author or has any interest in being one. I Have done a few amazing things in my life over the years, not to the level of going to space, but even if I did I wouldnt write a book about it either.
My point was not that MYSQL was not supported but rather that it was forked to create MARIADB after ORACLE bought SUN. (not sure why I am being modded down people here should know that was what I meant)
tell that to the 240 maimed or hurt, sure you dont have your legs, but hey only a handful of people would have been hurt instead of a buttload, but you might be dead!
all those should be cut as well. not sure how i proved his point. i proved that my point was not perfect but i did not prove his point
You went out of your way to say violent crime, you were intentionally misleading about your statistics. thats the great thing about statistics, they can say whatever you want them to depending on your personal views.
Except for the list you gave me does not represent "violent crime" it represents murder. Violent crime != murder
I used that because it sounded rediculous, I was not going to go looking for something specific. However you make a good point in this. Anything that is cut or changed will make someone upset.
plans to use the original hardware, as well as software,
I KNEW IT!!! I knew I should be writing code for the apple ][ instead of IOS ....
well technically yes. I am sure that some other pissed off people out there will fork the revision and continue support for the version that is officially no longer supported. you see it happen all the time for example mySQL - MARIADB
and to be fair, the link you cited spoke of murder, however you kept using the term violent crime. Those numbers vary differently. murder is not really the important meteric to me personally, violent crime is. the fact remains I am far more likely to be hit by lightning than murdered by another human in the USA. violent crime I have a way higher chance of becoming a victim to compared to being murdered.
citation of what that boston is a gun free zone yet someone did major damage there a few weeks back?
- http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/a/gunlaws_ma_3.htm
but again even if it were not, it just shows that if you take away the guns, you can still buy a crockpot. or are you claiming the boston bombing did not happen??
There are other factors and I am only using our country and our values as a bassis. You look in places in america that have open carry, you dont have as much violent crime as you do in places where you cannot have a gun. that is a fact in america.
Mexico kind of proves my point, hardcore strict gun laws, yet a very high violent crime rate (we can argue that the drug war contributes to the high gun rate as well)
you make a good point, and I did see that as well. quite simply one is much more neutral than the prior while there is still slant. One is more of a make you think question. while the other is nothing but loaded.
Here in NY anyway there is a company who installs and maintains solar panels on your own home, however you dont own them, you are now feeding into the power grid, but you are still paying the same (or slightly lower) than before. saving the upfront high costs. I know one family who has done it and so far it seems to be a good plan. If there was a "rent to own" feature in the contract of the panels I would be more willing to go along with this particular model. Sorry for the off topic rant
But for one prime example on how gunfree zones will not stop murder, even if we got rid of guns completely. take boston. it is a gun free city, and yet there are over 240 people injured in a matter of seconds, far quicker than what it took for the gunman in conn to take out a classroom. I am sure there are other examples on how gun control does not stop criminals
it has been proven time and time again
gun free zones do not stop murder from happening. In places where there is strict anti gun laws, the crime rates are higher then in places without anti gun laws
almost ever mass murder by gunman has taken place in gun free zones. I mean if you wanted to debate vortex thats one thing, but with the way you speak to people "lower than you" (since you are a scientist and all) make it not even worth it.
Grassroots conservatives really dont care about a lot of issues that the liberals claim that are for/against. I would wager it is safe to say the same for the way conservatives feel towards liberals ideas. I know a good portion of both and lean libertarian myself, Plain and simple the fringe is what is spoken about by both sides. If we asked neutral questions instead of loaded questions like the media (both fox and msnbc) we would be better off. Instead of asking "if we invest X into solar by raising taxes on Y (oil) is that good for the country?" how about we simply ask "would you switch over to solar if the cost was close to the same as you pay for energy today?"
do you see how one turns into a fight and the other does not?
I could point out that some research on both sides are utterly crap. funding the study of beetles migration habits? yeah I dont think we need to waste money on that one
the FBI's general counsel. 'We don't have the ability to go to court and say, "We need a court order to effectuate the intercept." Other countries have that.'
Last time I checked, that was always a selling point of this country
Thank goodness for anon cowards to tell us all to judge a book by its cover
but to be clear, cutting the other 50%, frees the money up for the states, hopefully they dont ake it all, or more, but they can and should use some of the freed up money
if we did that in conjunction with everything else that the states do, or could do better, it would be even sooner. but yes, dropping military spending by somewhere over 50% would make me happy, but i also want to cut some 50% of the democrats stuff as well personally.
I understand that
the point was the music our parents bought through Itunes in the beginning.. but are still listening to them. I understand just as well as you how trivial it is. but for a non technical person, its still jumping through hoops.
usually they have a front store, something that is mostly cash transactions, hot dog trucks, dry cleaning businesses etc..... or so I am told.....
the issue is not "covering the expense" it is deciding which expenses need to be cut. Our economy brings in more in each year then we spent per year only a decades ago. there is no excuse that spending levels have gone up to trillion dollar deficits when we still take in more money than only a decade ago. Let me ask you something. has anything gotten better for the rising taxes and government spending? Some will argue for others against of course. I argue that we dont get nearly as much for what our government spends vs 10 years ago. Even if we got the exact same that we got 10 years ago from our tax money, there is no reason for spending to have gone up.
somewhere along the line the federal government forgot all about the 10th amendment.
and how many machines these days ship without CDROMS? My last 3 laptops were all dvd free