Hey, you're paying those taxes anyway, but since they're going to the war, you don't benefit from them at all.
Also, both Clinton and Obama still want to support private healthcare in addition to universal healthcare, so if you're looking to have a procedure with a long waiting list, you can always dole out the cash to bypass that. Waiting lists are never really a problem for regular checkups, so you could always save your healthcare money for more important things.
Then I suppose it's a good thing that none of the candidates want to pay for war and healthcare.
I suppose you would ideally prefer that there be no war or healthcare, but if you're forced to pay for just one, the war is more expensive than healthcare, so choosing healthcare would be the better way to reduce your debt.
(Not that I can sympathize with that position. As a Canadian who enjoys public healthcare, and has known Americans who suffered due to lack of access to healthcare, I'd like to see the USA adopt public healthcare.)
For the tl;dr crowd, Jack challenged Jason Della Rocca to a debate about the Virginia Tech shooting, but when Jason responded that he would be uncomfortable profiting off of a massacre and suggested a free debate at Dawson College (site of the Dawson College shooting), Jack's response was "Sorry. Have to pay the bills."
Although, if you're bringing your laptop on the plane, there's a good chance you actually want to use your laptop on the plane, and you'd be pretty lucky to get a WiFi signal up there.
Not a bottom up, adopt the lowest common denominator of whats already out there Sure, the ISO does that a lot, and it's a fine approach. But that takes time, which is why the fast-track process was designed for standards which have already been implemented.
asking someone for permission should happen BEFORE acting Where do you draw the line? When I'm walking down the street, should I not be allowed to turn my head and look at any houses until I get permission?
Their house is visible from public property. You don't deserve any privacy when you're in public.
Here's the difference, though. You're assuming the OP said:
"Rob Weir can't be trusted because it's in his best interest for OOXML to fail."
But the spirit of what the OP said was actually closer to this:
"I don't trust Rob Weir, because it's in his best interest for OOXML to fail."
It's actually a pretty big difference. The first statement is a logical fallacy, but the second one is just explaining his personal bias. And keep in mind that the OP specifically stated that Rob Weir "might well be right".
I'm having trouble comprehending that *anyone* once said Firefox had no serious memory leaks. Say what? This may seem like a technical detail, but memory hog != memory leak. Off the top of my head, here's some of the big problems I remember the Mozilla team talking about when it comes to memory footprint:
* Firefox was storing JPEGs and other images as uncompressed bitmaps in memory. * Firefox was storing a cache of a lot of pages in your history, even if you hadn't gone back in your history for hours. * It also used as much free memory as you had on your machine for this cache, and while that arguably didn't actually affect the users (because they weren't using that memory for anything else anyway) it looked really bad in benchmarks. * Firefox had trouble with memory fragmentation. * Firefox extensions were leaking memory -- this is the only bonafide memory leak, and it's not entirely Mozilla's fault.
I do recall the Mozilla team saying that, like any large app, there were a number of small memory leaks, but those weren't responsible for Firefox's large memory footprint.
People seem to think that being a scientist is like working a day job, 9 to 5, then leaving it at the office. It'[s not. Science is a 27/7 way of life. You think it would be OK for your local pastor to go home and give up offerings to Zeus? Then why should it be OK for an astronomer to go home and read horoscopes. Or what, they'll go to Scientist Hell?
You're implying that even though a religious scientist may write good papers and conduct reliable experiments, their output is somehow unexplainably and unquestionably inferior to the output of real scientists.
Unexplainably and unquestionably... Do you know what that sounds like?
Could everybody who tagged this as 'duh' explain to me exactly how you felt it was obvious that while the NMDA receptor is required to begin neural strengthening, the mGlu receptor causes strengthening to stop?
We presumably have dozens of dreams per night that we don't remember, the vast majority of which are neither realistic nor "threat dreams". Actually, TFA says precisely the opposite:
Although we tend to dwell on the bizarreness of dreams... Threat dreams were the norm, accounting for a staggering two-thirds of all dreams.
You mean "useful", not "unique". It also needs to be unique, but that's covered by the "new" (or more formally, "novel") stipulation. I've never heard of a immoral patents being excluded, but it would be easy for a judge or patent clerk to claim that sex toys aren't useful. (However, if you have a good enough lawyer, you can claim that anything capable of making money is useful.)
The moral stipulation sounds suspect to me, if only because it would be even more subjective than the three patent stipulations we've already mentioned. On one hand, it would be easy to come up with medical purposes for sex toys or drug paraphernalia, and on the other hand, this is Slashdot, so you won't have to look very far to find someone who will claim that all patents are immoral >:)
You should try doing something just for fun once in a while.
Besides, novels can be explorations of the human condition. It's knowledge, but not the kind you're likely to need to reference.
You've volunteered to work as a farm-hand. The job they tell you to do is to shovel shit. You aren't doing a very good job, and you're told that if you don't shape up, you'll be fired. Are you suddenly inclined to work harder, so you can spend even more time shoveling shit?
I enjoy being violent and aggressive about as much as I enjoy shoveling shit. If my life expectancy drops because I'm not willing to learn how to be violent and aggressive, that doesn't matter to me. I'd rather live a short life that I enjoy than a long life that I don't.
(And for what it's worth, I doubt my life expectancy will drop.)
I have no sympathy for you. You have no more right to download a $20 CD for free when the author doesn't want you to than you do to walk into a store and steal a $20 CD.
Some of us have a more legitimate worry. I rip my own CDs and movies onto my computer, so that I can use them without digging through discs. There is no way you can justify that being illegal.
Researches indicated that these changes could effect people in some way. We all know there's only two things that effect humans: alcohol, and expired condoms.
Kindle's choice for a monochrome screen wasn't really a choice. Color e-paper isn't fully developed yet.
So why use e-paper if it's not colour? The advantage of e-paper, aside from being easy on the eyes, is that it only uses power while updating the page. That means you can leave it open on a single page forever and it will never require power. The battery life of these things is way longer than an iPhone.
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, you're paying those taxes anyway, but since they're going to the war, you don't benefit from them at all.
Also, both Clinton and Obama still want to support private healthcare in addition to universal healthcare, so if you're looking to have a procedure with a long waiting list, you can always dole out the cash to bypass that. Waiting lists are never really a problem for regular checkups, so you could always save your healthcare money for more important things.
Then I suppose it's a good thing that none of the candidates want to pay for war and healthcare.
I suppose you would ideally prefer that there be no war or healthcare, but if you're forced to pay for just one, the war is more expensive than healthcare, so choosing healthcare would be the better way to reduce your debt.
(Not that I can sympathize with that position. As a Canadian who enjoys public healthcare, and has known Americans who suffered due to lack of access to healthcare, I'd like to see the USA adopt public healthcare.)
I noticed that one too; as far as I can tell, there's no way to tell whether Alex is taller than Eunice or vice versa.
For the tl;dr crowd, Jack challenged Jason Della Rocca to a debate about the Virginia Tech shooting, but when Jason responded that he would be uncomfortable profiting off of a massacre and suggested a free debate at Dawson College (site of the Dawson College shooting), Jack's response was "Sorry. Have to pay the bills."
That was exactly my point. You're not capable of working offline if none of your data is offline.
Although, if you're bringing your laptop on the plane, there's a good chance you actually want to use your laptop on the plane, and you'd be pretty lucky to get a WiFi signal up there.
The article is cited. There's even some ISBN numbers in those references!
Adding a second DVD for some games is okay, but because of the sandbox design of Oblivion, you would be constantly swapping discs.
The only redeeming factor would be that you'd get some exercise from getting off the couch and walking to your console so often.
Well, Bethesda was worried that they wouldn't be able to fit Oblivion on one DVD, although they did manage to squeeze everything down in the end.
Rage, Id's next game, is going to ship on two DVDs, or one BluRay disc.
Their house is visible from public property. You don't deserve any privacy when you're in public.
Here's the difference, though. You're assuming the OP said:
"Rob Weir can't be trusted because it's in his best interest for OOXML to fail."
But the spirit of what the OP said was actually closer to this:
"I don't trust Rob Weir, because it's in his best interest for OOXML to fail."
It's actually a pretty big difference. The first statement is a logical fallacy, but the second one is just explaining his personal bias. And keep in mind that the OP specifically stated that Rob Weir "might well be right".
* Firefox was storing JPEGs and other images as uncompressed bitmaps in memory.
* Firefox was storing a cache of a lot of pages in your history, even if you hadn't gone back in your history for hours.
* It also used as much free memory as you had on your machine for this cache, and while that arguably didn't actually affect the users (because they weren't using that memory for anything else anyway) it looked really bad in benchmarks.
* Firefox had trouble with memory fragmentation.
* Firefox extensions were leaking memory -- this is the only bonafide memory leak, and it's not entirely Mozilla's fault.
I do recall the Mozilla team saying that, like any large app, there were a number of small memory leaks, but those weren't responsible for Firefox's large memory footprint.
You're implying that even though a religious scientist may write good papers and conduct reliable experiments, their output is somehow unexplainably and unquestionably inferior to the output of real scientists.
Unexplainably and unquestionably... Do you know what that sounds like?
Same goes for FX contact lenses. They're weighted on the bottom so that your new cat eyes never spin sideways.
Could everybody who tagged this as 'duh' explain to me exactly how you felt it was obvious that while the NMDA receptor is required to begin neural strengthening, the mGlu receptor causes strengthening to stop?
You mean "useful", not "unique". It also needs to be unique, but that's covered by the "new" (or more formally, "novel") stipulation. I've never heard of a immoral patents being excluded, but it would be easy for a judge or patent clerk to claim that sex toys aren't useful. (However, if you have a good enough lawyer, you can claim that anything capable of making money is useful.)
The moral stipulation sounds suspect to me, if only because it would be even more subjective than the three patent stipulations we've already mentioned. On one hand, it would be easy to come up with medical purposes for sex toys or drug paraphernalia, and on the other hand, this is Slashdot, so you won't have to look very far to find someone who will claim that all patents are immoral >:)
Aluminum is also light-weight, corrosion-resistant, and has grey oxidization, so those may not be the best tests.
You should try doing something just for fun once in a while. Besides, novels can be explorations of the human condition. It's knowledge, but not the kind you're likely to need to reference.
Imagine this scenario:
You've volunteered to work as a farm-hand. The job they tell you to do is to shovel shit. You aren't doing a very good job, and you're told that if you don't shape up, you'll be fired. Are you suddenly inclined to work harder, so you can spend even more time shoveling shit?
I enjoy being violent and aggressive about as much as I enjoy shoveling shit. If my life expectancy drops because I'm not willing to learn how to be violent and aggressive, that doesn't matter to me. I'd rather live a short life that I enjoy than a long life that I don't.
(And for what it's worth, I doubt my life expectancy will drop.)
I have no sympathy for you. You have no more right to download a $20 CD for free when the author doesn't want you to than you do to walk into a store and steal a $20 CD. Some of us have a more legitimate worry. I rip my own CDs and movies onto my computer, so that I can use them without digging through discs. There is no way you can justify that being illegal.
I noticed! But maybe that's because I don't like carrying a cell phone around.
Kindle's choice for a monochrome screen wasn't really a choice. Color e-paper isn't fully developed yet.
So why use e-paper if it's not colour? The advantage of e-paper, aside from being easy on the eyes, is that it only uses power while updating the page. That means you can leave it open on a single page forever and it will never require power. The battery life of these things is way longer than an iPhone.