Stop your fucking trolling. They violated the law in a bigoted advertising campaign, there's no "slander" involved.
They violated the law in not properly reporting non-monetary contributions in support of Proposition 8 and paid a $5500 fine. Mind sharing which advertising that was paid for by the Mormons was so bigoted?
Are you seriously trying to argue that religious people shouldn't be allowed to vote because it isn't fair for the non-religous people? Or are you only suggesting that religious people that disagree with *you* should be baned from voting? Or maybe you are suggesting that people should only be able to vote for a law if they can somehow prove it may effect them. I'm not quite sure which of these (or perhaps something else entirely) you'd like to see implemented.
Mormons voted, based on their religion, to ban homosexual marriage. This ban applies to people who do not follow that religion. Do I need to draw you a diagram?
Are you suggesting that no Mormons are homosexual? Or are you suggesting that no Mormons voted against prop8? I assure you that if you are both suggestions are false.
Not hate speech, but copyright, and used to silence critics with lawsuits;
Eh, as those critics are still there I wouldn't really call the "silenced". Also, it wasn't criticism that was targetted, but publishing a pages from a Church manual online. I imagine if they'd instead tried to summarize the content in their own words there wouldn't have been a lawsuit.
Disclaimer: IAAM
Instead of ideas such as making people smaller why not simply confront the fact that we need to severely restrict births. A lower population eats less meat, needs less roads and cars and allows general preservation of the environment as well as having natural land for wild life.
Simply have rules that allow only the best young people to have one child in one marriage. Problem solved and no test tubes or fancy thinking need be involved at all.
Yes, great idea! Let's create a world government with enough power to:
- measure the best-ness of every single human
- decide who gets to have children. Not the best? Sorry, no kids for you dumb-ass! And I'm sure this entire process would be done fairly and transparently and wouldn't favor the people in power....
- the power to enforce its decisions from people who may not want to follow the rules and may be trying to hide pregnancies. That means somehow getting all females on the planet to take periodic pregnancy tests (probably a blood test so the results can't be faked) and aborting the preganancies of anyone who is pregnant without permission.
Great world you envision.... I'd personally rather give up meat....
At least we haven't had any World Wars since the UN was founded. There have been also a dramatic decrease in wars between countries. Getting involved in civil wars wasn't the UN's original purpose, but its mission has expended since it has been so successful in preventing other kinds of wars.
And by that logic the TSA has a legitimate claim to preventing terrorists from highjacking more planes.
If he still has a job after news leaks that he was accused of possessing child pornography he won't after law enforcement goes to his employer looking for evidence of embezzling *their* because they can't use the evidence on his computer...
there != their
Too bad there is no edit button, huh....
Fruit of the poisonous tree, that evidence would be inadmissible.
This is first year law school stuff...
If he still has a job after news leaks that he was accused of possessing child pornography he won't after law enforcement goes to his employer looking for evidence of embezzling *their* because they can't use the evidence on his computer...
you are talking rubbish. kernel multitasking != sandboxed app multitasking..
The anonymous that I was responding to was the one that used the term "cooperative multitasking" to describe iOS. Cooperative Multitasking has a very specific definition in regards to operating systems and iOS is definitely not a cooperative multitasking operating system. Once again, if you cared you could type, "cooperative multitasking" into your favorite search engine, click on the wikipedia link, and then read all about it.... If you cared..... Which you must not since you haven't already....
So IOS 4 used cooperative multitasking (http://forums.pcworld.com/index.php?/topic/89287-apple-ios-4-vs-android-multitasking-which-approach-is-better-for-users/page__st__160) while I believe android uses a modern pre-emptive multitasking approach. I know IOS 5 has updated multtasking but it is unclear to me if they have gone to a full pre-emptive multitasking scheme.
iOS has always had a full multi-tasking kernel. It is Unix for crying out loud. I would write more, but obviously you don't care because otherwise you would have typed, "iPhone Kernel Multitasking" into your favorite search engine and found and read any of the top articles that the search engine provides. Go on, try it out, if you care at all, which I doubt........ And really, for "proof" you grabbed post #161 from random post on some article?
Providing for the common defense is one of the few constitutional tasks of the Federal Government, and it is spending a tiny fraction on this compared to it's myriad of unconstitutional adventures, such as Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other stuff it has no legal right to do.
Just because providing for the common defense is a constitionally mandated task doesn't mean this isn't a waste of money. I mean, come on.... The US is borrowing more than $1 for every man, women, and child to pay for just this ridiculus system.... The US military budget is currently the #1 largest in the world and more than ten times higher than #2. Are we expecting to fight the entire world? If not then most of this money we spend on "defense" is is a ridiculus waste of tax dollars....
Please you can go back and forth on this mindless drivel for days.
Are you really trying to compare North Korea threatening "unexpected consequences" with building a large flag pole?
Disclaimer - I lived as a civilian for two years in South Korea and have a lot of love for that country.
USPTO drops any apple patent that implements obvious designs with established prior art.
If there is established prior art then shouldn't Samsung easily defeat those patents in court? Not saying they Samsung won't defeat them in court. Just saying that if anything really is obviously prior art as far as the patent office is concerned then Samsung has nothing to worry about.
The Federal government is far from perfect, but it's a way better solution than what Ron Paul wants. I also can't believe that someone can watch what is happening in the Euro zone right now and say that they want that model for the US (unified currency, but each state sets its own monetary policy, with no Fed). The level of cognitive dissonance would cause their brain to explode.
The last bit of that post is a quote from the above poster that wasn't properly wrapped. I'll respond to that here. I think you are misrepresenting Ron Paul's position on currency. Ron Paul wants to allow multiple currencies that can compete with each other. On a world wide level we already deal with this without too much trouble.
Also, in regards to what do you claim there is "cognitive dissonance" going on? All I want is for the Federal government to stick to the functions defined in the constition and for the more local governments to fill in the vacume left behind (and I want it done in an orderly manner).
Because rolling back the country to 1787 standards is insane?
Which standards are you refering to exactly?
Plus, I'm not seeing where my state and local legislators are that much better than the Feds, especially since so many problems are interconnected now.
You'll have an easier time changing policy in your state or your local legistalators then convincing the Feds to change. And if you fail you can always move to a different state that does things more to your liking. Right now imagine if whichever party you dislike gained enough power in Washington to do whatever it wanted for the forseeable future. What would you do? Where would you go?
How would a statist deal with Acid Rain (which is generated by pollution in one state, but falls on other states)? If there's no EPA, then you're left with the messy and untenable solution of states suing other states with no higher authority to step in and resolve the disputes, and of course there are 49 individual disputes for each and every issue...
Ron Paul's plan doesn't eliminate the EPA (though he has talked about eliminating it in the past). Ron Paul's position is that the EPA allows companies to pollute and that parties on the recieving end of pollution can and should sue in civil court.
The Federal government is far from perfect, but it's a way better solution than what Ron Paul wants.
I also can't believe that someone can watch what is happening in the Euro zone right now and say that they want that model for the US (unified currency, but each state sets its own monetary policy, with no Fed). The level of cognitive dissonance would cause their brain to explode.
Our tax code includes special provisions for marriage couples. Marriage has always been a legal matter; the idea that marriage is strictly about love and spending the rest of your life with your one true love is a relatively modern trend.
I would prefer the tax code be revised.
Also, I think you are incorrect about saying that it is relatively "recent" that marriage became about love. In about two seconds of google'ing I found a quote from Confucius saying "Marriage is the union of two different surnames, in friendship and in love..." I guess he must of just been ahead of his time.
...only because he wants to send this country back to the 1800s in terms of education.
Ignoring the rest of it the Department of Education was formed in the 1980's; not the 1800's. And America's quality of education has been going down ever since.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop your fucking trolling. They violated the law in a bigoted advertising campaign, there's no "slander" involved.
They violated the law in not properly reporting non-monetary contributions in support of Proposition 8 and paid a $5500 fine. Mind sharing which advertising that was paid for by the Mormons was so bigoted?
Mormons voted, based on their religion, to ban homosexual marriage. This ban applies to people who do not follow that religion. Do I need to draw you a diagram?
Are you suggesting that no Mormons are homosexual? Or are you suggesting that no Mormons voted against prop8? I assure you that if you are both suggestions are false.
That didn't stop you from forcing your religion on homosexual couples in California.
In what way exactly has religion been forced onto homosexual couples in California and how did the Mormons single-handedly force it on them?
Not hate speech, but copyright, and used to silence critics with lawsuits;
Eh, as those critics are still there I wouldn't really call the "silenced". Also, it wasn't criticism that was targetted, but publishing a pages from a Church manual online. I imagine if they'd instead tried to summarize the content in their own words there wouldn't have been a lawsuit. Disclaimer: IAAM
This report was brought to you by Verizon.
I wanted to mod you up, but you didn't have a link for those that missed the whole funny affair.... http://verizonmath.blogspot.com/
Instead of ideas such as making people smaller why not simply confront the fact that we need to severely restrict births. A lower population eats less meat, needs less roads and cars and allows general preservation of the environment as well as having natural land for wild life. Simply have rules that allow only the best young people to have one child in one marriage. Problem solved and no test tubes or fancy thinking need be involved at all.
Yes, great idea! Let's create a world government with enough power to: - measure the best-ness of every single human - decide who gets to have children. Not the best? Sorry, no kids for you dumb-ass! And I'm sure this entire process would be done fairly and transparently and wouldn't favor the people in power.... - the power to enforce its decisions from people who may not want to follow the rules and may be trying to hide pregnancies. That means somehow getting all females on the planet to take periodic pregnancy tests (probably a blood test so the results can't be faked) and aborting the preganancies of anyone who is pregnant without permission. Great world you envision.... I'd personally rather give up meat....
At least we haven't had any World Wars since the UN was founded. There have been also a dramatic decrease in wars between countries. Getting involved in civil wars wasn't the UN's original purpose, but its mission has expended since it has been so successful in preventing other kinds of wars.
And by that logic the TSA has a legitimate claim to preventing terrorists from highjacking more planes.
If he still has a job after news leaks that he was accused of possessing child pornography he won't after law enforcement goes to his employer looking for evidence of embezzling *their* because they can't use the evidence on his computer...
there != their Too bad there is no edit button, huh....
Fruit of the poisonous tree, that evidence would be inadmissible. This is first year law school stuff...
If he still has a job after news leaks that he was accused of possessing child pornography he won't after law enforcement goes to his employer looking for evidence of embezzling *their* because they can't use the evidence on his computer...
Both of the two major US political parties are mostly hypocritical. They just pander to different groups to get in power.
The days of America's manned space program are over now that Medicare and Social Security are running deep into the red.
Not that I particularly like Medicare and Social Security, but I prefer both of those to our huge military build up and foreign wars.
Fanboys? Overpriced RAM? Pick two.
Insulting comments? Troll? Pick two.
Poor Apple... with their outdated OS X, useless iPad and simply useless iPhone... They have been surpassed by Fedora and Windows.
Yeah, poor Apple..... Where will they find the money to fund improvements to their OS? It is just hopeless, completely hopeless.....
you are talking rubbish. kernel multitasking != sandboxed app multitasking..
The anonymous that I was responding to was the one that used the term "cooperative multitasking" to describe iOS. Cooperative Multitasking has a very specific definition in regards to operating systems and iOS is definitely not a cooperative multitasking operating system. Once again, if you cared you could type, "cooperative multitasking" into your favorite search engine, click on the wikipedia link, and then read all about it.... If you cared..... Which you must not since you haven't already....
So IOS 4 used cooperative multitasking (http://forums.pcworld.com/index.php?/topic/89287-apple-ios-4-vs-android-multitasking-which-approach-is-better-for-users/page__st__160) while I believe android uses a modern pre-emptive multitasking approach. I know IOS 5 has updated multtasking but it is unclear to me if they have gone to a full pre-emptive multitasking scheme.
iOS has always had a full multi-tasking kernel. It is Unix for crying out loud. I would write more, but obviously you don't care because otherwise you would have typed, "iPhone Kernel Multitasking" into your favorite search engine and found and read any of the top articles that the search engine provides. Go on, try it out, if you care at all, which I doubt.... .... And really, for "proof" you grabbed post #161 from random post on some article?
Your assessment is.... erroneous.
Providing for the common defense is one of the few constitutional tasks of the Federal Government, and it is spending a tiny fraction on this compared to it's myriad of unconstitutional adventures, such as Welfare, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other stuff it has no legal right to do.
Just because providing for the common defense is a constitionally mandated task doesn't mean this isn't a waste of money. I mean, come on.... The US is borrowing more than $1 for every man, women, and child to pay for just this ridiculus system.... The US military budget is currently the #1 largest in the world and more than ten times higher than #2. Are we expecting to fight the entire world? If not then most of this money we spend on "defense" is is a ridiculus waste of tax dollars....
They only reduced the size a *little bit*.
Yes just like the flagpole the South Koreans erected first? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daeseong-dong
Please you can go back and forth on this mindless drivel for days.
Are you really trying to compare North Korea threatening "unexpected consequences" with building a large flag pole? Disclaimer - I lived as a civilian for two years in South Korea and have a lot of love for that country.
USPTO drops any apple patent that implements obvious designs with established prior art.
If there is established prior art then shouldn't Samsung easily defeat those patents in court? Not saying they Samsung won't defeat them in court. Just saying that if anything really is obviously prior art as far as the patent office is concerned then Samsung has nothing to worry about.
I for one appreciate that Apple has decided to make sure their "Evil" setting is turned off by default for the time being.
You analogies suck.
What you mean to say is, "Your analogies suck (after I change your analogies)."
The Federal government is far from perfect, but it's a way better solution than what Ron Paul wants. I also can't believe that someone can watch what is happening in the Euro zone right now and say that they want that model for the US (unified currency, but each state sets its own monetary policy, with no Fed). The level of cognitive dissonance would cause their brain to explode.
The last bit of that post is a quote from the above poster that wasn't properly wrapped. I'll respond to that here. I think you are misrepresenting Ron Paul's position on currency. Ron Paul wants to allow multiple currencies that can compete with each other. On a world wide level we already deal with this without too much trouble.
Also, in regards to what do you claim there is "cognitive dissonance" going on? All I want is for the Federal government to stick to the functions defined in the constition and for the more local governments to fill in the vacume left behind (and I want it done in an orderly manner).
Because rolling back the country to 1787 standards is insane?
Which standards are you refering to exactly?
Plus, I'm not seeing where my state and local legislators are that much better than the Feds, especially since so many problems are interconnected now.
You'll have an easier time changing policy in your state or your local legistalators then convincing the Feds to change. And if you fail you can always move to a different state that does things more to your liking. Right now imagine if whichever party you dislike gained enough power in Washington to do whatever it wanted for the forseeable future. What would you do? Where would you go?
How would a statist deal with Acid Rain (which is generated by pollution in one state, but falls on other states)? If there's no EPA, then you're left with the messy and untenable solution of states suing other states with no higher authority to step in and resolve the disputes, and of course there are 49 individual disputes for each and every issue...
Ron Paul's plan doesn't eliminate the EPA (though he has talked about eliminating it in the past). Ron Paul's position is that the EPA allows companies to pollute and that parties on the recieving end of pollution can and should sue in civil court. The Federal government is far from perfect, but it's a way better solution than what Ron Paul wants. I also can't believe that someone can watch what is happening in the Euro zone right now and say that they want that model for the US (unified currency, but each state sets its own monetary policy, with no Fed). The level of cognitive dissonance would cause their brain to explode.
Our tax code includes special provisions for marriage couples. Marriage has always been a legal matter; the idea that marriage is strictly about love and spending the rest of your life with your one true love is a relatively modern trend.
I would prefer the tax code be revised.
Also, I think you are incorrect about saying that it is relatively "recent" that marriage became about love. In about two seconds of google'ing I found a quote from Confucius saying "Marriage is the union of two different surnames, in friendship and in love..." I guess he must of just been ahead of his time.
...only because he wants to send this country back to the 1800s in terms of education.
Ignoring the rest of it the Department of Education was formed in the 1980's; not the 1800's. And America's quality of education has been going down ever since.