Let's see, what dangerous things do people do while driving:
1) Drink 2) Drive while sleepy 3) Take imparing edications (like painkillers) 4) Shave 5) Read the paper 6) Talk on cell phones 7) Fiddle with the radio 8) Drive recklessly 9) Ignore posted traffic signs 10) Eat.....and probably more. So, what is to stop his customers of "Suburban Pilots" from doing these things? Now, he wants to COMBINE the two.
In a worst-case scenario, a drunk or willfully impaired pilot will crash their plane and kill people on the ground. In a best case scenario, the pilot will crash and only kill themselves, eliminating the chance they will make the same bad choice again.
For some reason, this idiot thinks flying should be a casual activity. Unfortunately, that's not the case: Flying is NOT a casual activity, even for pilots. It may be relaxing and recreational, but even then its something that requires serious attention. I am not a pilot, but I am pretty sure pilots would not take the act of flying with the same approach as driving to the corner store.
Furthermore, there is the question of maintenance: As a mechanic, I've see nhow people maintain their cars: They don't. The biggest excuse is cost, with "It was making funny sounds", a "little light came on", or "I think something is wrong". Usually, people wait until a minor problem (such as an oil change being needed or a small radiator leak) becomes a major problem (engine seizes or radiator hose fails). If his target customers can't afford to perform maintenance on their cars WHEN ITS NEEDED, what's to say they'll fix their planes when it's needed?
Also, one needs to compare the accident rates for proffesionals (i.e. people who do it for a living, or spend the vast majority of their time doing it):
Driving: Compare the accident rates of proffesional drivers, such as stunt car drivers, test drivers, and race car drivers (who are driving outside of a racing environment) with those who drive to work, school, the store, etc.
Flying: Compare the accident rates of recreational pilots with those who fly for airlines.
The difference betwee the two isn't as significant as that between average drivers and professional drivers, but it will become far more pronounced if the idea of marketing these "cars/planes" succeeds. Plus, when a plane crashes, it does damage to whatever stops it, much like cars, only alot more since it's falling from tens of thousands of feet and moving at about 200 MPH.
Also, provided any insurance company insures it, just how much will it be? I seriously doubt this will pass a crash test, either from falling from the sky or getting hit by another car.
Someone needs to teach this guy: An exotic idea isn't always a good one. Hybrid planes/cars are a good example.
Just how much longer until political correctness takes away all of our freedoms and liberties? Soon, we'll be having to:
1) File an "Environmental Impact Report" every time we use the bathroom. 2) Hire a lawyer every time we say something. 3) Consult the ACLU whenever we say something. 4) Consult an environmental group every time we want to burn wood in our fireplaces (it's illegal to use you fireplace if it creates smoke where i live in California). 5) Register all teacups (or anything that can be used to harm someone) with the State and Federal Governments. 6) Give your house to a criminal who you hurt while he tried to rob you after breaking into your house. 7) Consult the ACLU and rights groups whenever you learn something. 8) Hire a lawyer to accomany you wherever you go. 9) Consult "Fair Trade" groups whenever you shop. 10 Consult Unions whenever you shop. 11) Consult PETA whenever you shop. 12) Consult a nutritionist whenever you cook dinner. 13) Consult the EPA whenever you mow your lawn. 14) Use Union Labor to do household chores for you. 15) Consult an environmental group whenever you fish or hunt. 16) Pay for medical care, food, housing, education, and clothing for illegal immigrants who don't care about the law enogh to enter legally and think they have a right to my hard earned money. 17) Consult an environmental group whenever you go for a walk or hike. 18) Consult a Patent Attorney every time you have an idea or share one. 19) Recite a disclaimer before you say anything. 20) Everything offensive becomes a "Hate Crime". 21) Insults become "Hate Crimes" (already in the U.K.)(Declared as torture by the U.N.)
Every time some delusional, bleeding heart, left-wing nutjob tell me how intolerant I am of other people, I just say, "You do realize that tolerance means tolerating intolerance, don't you?".
That always shuts them up pretty fast.
By the way: Wheather you like it or not, hate speech is free speech. And legal.
"I'm not really surprised that a Maclean's authour is on trial for this sort of behaviour. I don't really consider myself to be a left wing guy, but Maclean's is xenophobic, right-wing sucking pile of trash. I say this with no exaggeration."
So I guess you feel that you should be on trial too?
What the hell are we supposed to use to control and defend ourselves from unruly criminals? Strong language?!
Oh wait..... The UN already determined that to be torture - No joke.
Let see.....
Nightsticks: Effective only if you get a good, strong headshot. If you don't incapacitate the criminal, it just makes them madder. Guns: Usually kill the criminal. Not always a bad thing, but they leave you open to frivolous lawsuits from people who think that criminals should have rights while they commit a crime. Strong Language: Determined to be torture by the UN. Apparently, they claim it's torture to make someone feel bad by insulting them. Begging: Usually ineffective.
So let's see - It's torture to use a Taser to defend yourself from a criminal, but not torture to allow yourself to be subjected to violence from a criminal?
Screw the U.N. - I'll just shoot the worthless bastard in the nuts. It won't kill him, but he'll wish it had.
Actually, it would not be protected by the First Amendment, and the law would be Constitutional.
- The Government CAN restrict the speech of it's citizens. Speech that endangers the lives and/or safety, or advocates illegal actions. Examples would be saying the "So-ans-so should be shot", "I'm gonna kill you", yelling "Fire!" or "Bomb!" in a crowded place, saying "So-and-so should be killed", slander, and libel are technically not protected by the First Amendment. Supplying information that will knowingly be used to bring harm or danger to a person/place/thing falls into this category. Technically, "Hate Speech" and "Sexual Harassment" speech are also protected by the First Amendment, and international law, but nobody seems to understand this, as you could still be arrested.
The KKK can denounce blacks/jews/minorites (or anything that falls under their wide scope of hatred), but they cannot supply information that has the explicit intent to cause harm to anybody (even those that share their views). The same goes for Black Panthers/Nationalists, or any other person or group. Another example of this would be the Anti-Abortion/Pro-Life website (I forgot the name-it was awhile ago) that posted the names, photos, home addresses, business addresses, telephone numbers and other personally descriptive information with the intent of having other people, even on their own accord, of bringing harm against them, their families, employees, and businesses. The court order removing the information from the website, and the arrest of the individuals was challenged and defeated (on the grounds that it vilated the First Amendment), since it was intended to cause harm to the individuals mentioned.
The Government is attemting to prohibit the disclosure of information that violates international by denying human rights. To allow the disclosure of such information actually violates international law by aiding in the violation of human rights. Since the right of Free Speech does not apply to commercial entities, the Government can restrict what is said to foreign governments.
"and here is the fun part, the very fact that they are telling a commercial entity or citizen that they cannot restrict somebody's speech, is in-fact, restricting their speech."
-Again, the Government can restrict what it's citizens say. It an also restrict what is said by commercial entities and groups. I'll bet you would have a very hard time giving millions of Social Security numbers of American citizens in Mexico, since the only use could be for illegal operations in "creating" new identities for illegal immigrants, with harmful repercussions for American citizens. (The Mexican Government has explicitly stated that they are helping immigrants illegally enter the U.S. - No joke.)
Not really twisted, just an idea that will keep American companies with massive amounts of personally identifiable data from disclosing it knowing that it could be used to bring harm and human rights violations against other human beings by foreign governments.
P.S.: I trust you are not accessing SlashDot from Big Brother's computer!;-)
"Any suggestions for effective ways American citizens can push against this legislation?"
Yup. It's called "Plenty of rifles and ammunition to go around". So far, it's worked pretty well: Nobody has taken my computers, or other things.....at least while I'm still alive. The RIAA and MPAA are more than welcome to try.
For those who do not feel inclined to use deadly force against Big Brother, you can always rip and download from a WiFi network. If you actually *do* get caught, you can always say that you ripped the music from a CD and then threw the CD away, therefore the music you have on your computer is the copy you purchased, albeit in a different form (there is no law that says electronic music is illegal). A song in electronic form is just the same song as if it were in audible form: You still purchased it and then either converted it to either electronic form of audible form. Also, keep your audio/video files on a different, removable, encrypted hard drive. The drives that have features that destroy data and become an empty drive if an incorrect password is entered are fantastic. Also, rent and rip DVDs personally, so you can avoid hiden embedded code.
Another tip is: DO NOT UPLOAD. Yes, I know file sharers will hate me for saying that, but that is where the copying and infringement take place.
Interestingly enough, its amazing how much the government wants to regulate our lives, but dosn't wan't to pay for it, and make us foot the bill in order to comply with their whims..... Whims that are conjured up by some of the most power hungry, ass-backward, demented, half-witted individuals on the planet. This is another case of placing blame where it doesn't belong. You have the right to do business with anybody, and you cannnot control what they do with your product. What if a gas station sells an adult a cigarette lighter, who uses it to light the fuse on a bundle of dynamite that blows up a courthouse? I hope there are companies that openly denounce and refuse to cooperate.
What's next? A 10 day waiting period for a replacement propane tank for my BBQ?! How about a background check every time you fill your car up with gasoline? This is utterly ridiculous. Seeing as how pretty much EVERYTHING in existence can be used for some form of malfeasence, this makes everybody liable for just about everything.
The only thing that I would support is *HEAVILY* fining companies that do business with known spammers.
Another case of a company not listening to everybody else and continuing to think that it's products are better than they are.....
Ballmer and Gates need to realize that Vista just plain sucks. The big brouhaha surrounding it should be a big enough clue.
If Microsoft just stopped and listened to what customers were actually saying about Vista, and what they really want (instead of Gates and Ballmer deciding what customers want), and delivered something that was what CUSTOMERS ACTUALLY WANTED, they have the money and resources to create something that could be TRULY AWESOME.
Microsoft has blatantly ignored the fact that customers:
1) DO NOT want bloat. 2) DO NOT want eye candy. 3) DO NOT want product tie-ins. 4) DO NOT want compatibility problems. 5) DO NOT want compatibility problems to be routinely blamed on something other than Vista. 6) DO NOT want security problems. 7) DO NOT want spyware. 8) DO NOT care about flashy lights and fancy bells and whistles. 9) DO NOT want an OS with a mind of its own. 10) DO want a fully-functional OS. 11) DO want a GOOD BROWSER (IE sucks. Believe it.) 12) DO want to use product other than Microsoft's. 13) DO want an OS without so many goddamn problems as Vista. 14) DO want Microsoft to own up to its shortcomings and FIX THEM. 15) DO want a secure browser. 16) DO want a secure OS.
Of course, Ballmer and Gates continue to think they they "know what's best" for the customer, and that we have no clue what we want.
Vista is a work in progress just like a bowel movement is a work in progress.
Wow..... You've just discovered a huge conspiracy! Videogames are a part of Whitey's evil plan to keep Blacks poor, along with gold teeth, chrome-plated automobile parts, powerful stereo systems, and expensive jewelry. I assume you've already heard about the successful Communist plot to corrupt American Democracy by flouridating water, right?
BTW, who you play as in a videogame doesn't make you a racist. How many white/asian/black gamers play black athletes in sports games? What about Grand Theft Auto? Mortal Kombat? Double Dragon? Would a black gamer be just as racist for playing a black athlete in a sports game? What about an asian playing an asian in Mortal Kombat?
What do you suggest next? "Affirmative Action/Rebranded Racism" laws for the videogame industry? "Race Quotas"? A Jesse Jackson march? The "Race Card" has been played out. People aren't buying that excuse any more, and it's hurting the "issue" more than helping it. Obviously, it's a non-issue, since black gamers keep buying and playing those games.
Oh, and you say "nothing in the world happens without a white man"? So I guess that Martin Luther King, Condolezza Rice, Harriet Tubman, Nelson Mandela, Tiger Woods, Jesse Owens, Ricky Henderson, Thurgood Marshall, Clarence Thomas, Hank Aaron, George Washington Carver, Oliver Brown, and Kofi Annan never existed? How did Barack Obama become a front-running Presidential candidate if he doesn't exist?
Racist T.V. shows you say? How about Family Matters, Moesha, Sister Sister, Fat Albert, The George Cosby Show, The Black Kings Of Comedy, Sanford & Son, The Fresh Prince Of Bel Air (show about rich black people), Keenan & Kel, and BET? I don't hear you complaining about the racism of historically black colleges (almost all black student body), the NBA and NFL (There are far more black players than white ones), or the NAACP (putting black causes ahead of everything else). Is that kind of racism o.k. because they aren't about white people?
Next time you decide to post some "The World Is Racist And All Against Blacks" drivel, take a page from Martin Luther King..... Think before you speak.
The United States is becoming more and more a Nanny State.
What's next? Lessons on:
Not talking with your mouth full? Not running with sharp objects? Not teasing animals? Eating all of your vegetables? Not farting in elevators? How to blame other people for your own stupid actions?
I know this sounds harsh, but protecting people from themselves is like 'Reverse Evolution'. If they are too stupid to make the right choice, which is unbelievably SIMPLE, then why the hell should they contaminate the gene pool? I mean, why should I have to put up with the knee-jerk and bleeding-heat 'think of the children' laws whenever somebody makes a bad choice?
It's kinda like that retard in Chico, CA. Matthew Carrington wanted to get into a fraternity, so he chugged gallons of water because he answered trivia questions in a VOLUNTARY hazing ritual wrong, while doing calisthenics. Of course, when he inevitably died as the result of his own actions, his mother, who couldn't accept the fact that her "intelligent" son died wholly as the result of his own stupid choices, blamed everybody else for his death. He had every chance to say 'NO', but was to dumb (yet he got into Chico State) to figure it out. His fault entirely.
Here is a law idea: PROTECT US FROM KNEE-JERK LEGISLATORS, AND MAKE STUPID PEOPLE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS, AND NOT EVERYBODY ELSE!
There is something like that here in the U.S......
When I got my first credit card, I wrote "Check Photo I.D." in the signature box so that the cashier did the 'signature check that they were supposed to do, they would be reminded to check the photo I.D.. This ensured that all blame would fall on the merchant for not sufficiently verifying the identification of the person trying to pass the card. If a merchant simply accepts the card, and the info it contains, and fails to verify that it is valid, then the problem of fraudulent charges becomes the problem of the merchant/retailer.
If someone reports a fraudulent charge, they can always ask the merchant if a valid I.D. was checked and verified. Obviously, the answer is 'no' (if they saw 'yes' then the are lying, and that is a whole new problem for the merchant), and the merchant has to take responsibility for the charge.
There is always the possibility that the customer is lying, but, there are other ways to tell if the merchant is lying, or telling the truth (such as signatures and CCTV).
Slashdot Mirror
Let's see, what dangerous things do people do while driving:
.....and probably more. So, what is to stop his customers of "Suburban Pilots" from doing these things? Now, he wants to COMBINE the two.
1) Drink
2) Drive while sleepy
3) Take imparing edications (like painkillers)
4) Shave
5) Read the paper
6) Talk on cell phones
7) Fiddle with the radio
8) Drive recklessly
9) Ignore posted traffic signs
10) Eat
In a worst-case scenario, a drunk or willfully impaired pilot will crash their plane and kill people on the ground. In a best case scenario, the pilot will crash and only kill themselves, eliminating the chance they will make the same bad choice again.
For some reason, this idiot thinks flying should be a casual activity. Unfortunately, that's not the case: Flying is NOT a casual activity, even for pilots. It may be relaxing and recreational, but even then its something that requires serious attention. I am not a pilot, but I am pretty sure pilots would not take the act of flying with the same approach as driving to the corner store.
Furthermore, there is the question of maintenance: As a mechanic, I've see nhow people maintain their cars: They don't. The biggest excuse is cost, with "It was making funny sounds", a "little light came on", or "I think something is wrong". Usually, people wait until a minor problem (such as an oil change being needed or a small radiator leak) becomes a major problem (engine seizes or radiator hose fails). If his target customers can't afford to perform maintenance on their cars WHEN ITS NEEDED, what's to say they'll fix their planes when it's needed?
Also, one needs to compare the accident rates for proffesionals (i.e. people who do it for a living, or spend the vast majority of their time doing it):
Driving: Compare the accident rates of proffesional drivers, such as stunt car drivers, test drivers, and race car drivers (who are driving outside of a racing environment) with those who drive to work, school, the store, etc.
Flying: Compare the accident rates of recreational pilots with those who fly for airlines.
The difference betwee the two isn't as significant as that between average drivers and professional drivers, but it will become far more pronounced if the idea of marketing these "cars/planes" succeeds. Plus, when a plane crashes, it does damage to whatever stops it, much like cars, only alot more since it's falling from tens of thousands of feet and moving at about 200 MPH.
Also, provided any insurance company insures it, just how much will it be? I seriously doubt this will pass a crash test, either from falling from the sky or getting hit by another car.
Someone needs to teach this guy: An exotic idea isn't always a good one. Hybrid planes/cars are a good example.
.....Binary (01000010011010010110111001100001011100100111100100111111)?
Just how much longer until political correctness takes away all of our freedoms and liberties? Soon, we'll be having to:
1) File an "Environmental Impact Report" every time we use the bathroom.
2) Hire a lawyer every time we say something.
3) Consult the ACLU whenever we say something.
4) Consult an environmental group every time we want to burn wood in our fireplaces (it's illegal to use you fireplace if it creates smoke where i live in California).
5) Register all teacups (or anything that can be used to harm someone) with the State and Federal Governments.
6) Give your house to a criminal who you hurt while he tried to rob you after breaking into your house.
7) Consult the ACLU and rights groups whenever you learn something.
8) Hire a lawyer to accomany you wherever you go.
9) Consult "Fair Trade" groups whenever you shop.
10 Consult Unions whenever you shop.
11) Consult PETA whenever you shop.
12) Consult a nutritionist whenever you cook dinner.
13) Consult the EPA whenever you mow your lawn.
14) Use Union Labor to do household chores for you.
15) Consult an environmental group whenever you fish or hunt.
16) Pay for medical care, food, housing, education, and clothing for illegal immigrants who don't care about the law enogh to enter legally and think they have a right to my hard earned money.
17) Consult an environmental group whenever you go for a walk or hike.
18) Consult a Patent Attorney every time you have an idea or share one.
19) Recite a disclaimer before you say anything.
20) Everything offensive becomes a "Hate Crime".
21) Insults become "Hate Crimes" (already in the U.K.)(Declared as torture by the U.N.)
Every time some delusional, bleeding heart, left-wing nutjob tell me how intolerant I am of other people, I just say, "You do realize that tolerance means tolerating intolerance, don't you?".
That always shuts them up pretty fast.
By the way: Wheather you like it or not, hate speech is free speech. And legal.
"I'm not really surprised that a Maclean's authour is on trial for this sort of behaviour. I don't really consider myself to be a left wing guy, but Maclean's is xenophobic, right-wing sucking pile of trash. I say this with no exaggeration."
So I guess you feel that you should be on trial too?
Hypocritial moron.
What the hell are we supposed to use to control and defend ourselves from unruly criminals? Strong language?!
Oh wait..... The UN already determined that to be torture - No joke.
Let see.....
Nightsticks: Effective only if you get a good, strong headshot. If you don't incapacitate the criminal, it just makes them madder.
Guns: Usually kill the criminal. Not always a bad thing, but they leave you open to frivolous lawsuits from people who think that criminals should have rights while they commit a crime.
Strong Language: Determined to be torture by the UN. Apparently, they claim it's torture to make someone feel bad by insulting them.
Begging: Usually ineffective.
So let's see - It's torture to use a Taser to defend yourself from a criminal, but not torture to allow yourself to be subjected to violence from a criminal?
Screw the U.N. - I'll just shoot the worthless bastard in the nuts. It won't kill him, but he'll wish it had.
So what? You could get any robot with articulated "arms" with servomotors to conduct an orchestra.
Actually, it would not be protected by the First Amendment, and the law would be Constitutional.
;-)
- The Government CAN restrict the speech of it's citizens. Speech that endangers the lives and/or safety, or advocates illegal actions. Examples would be saying the "So-ans-so should be shot", "I'm gonna kill you", yelling "Fire!" or "Bomb!" in a crowded place, saying "So-and-so should be killed", slander, and libel are technically not protected by the First Amendment. Supplying information that will knowingly be used to bring harm or danger to a person/place/thing falls into this category. Technically, "Hate Speech" and "Sexual Harassment" speech are also protected by the First Amendment, and international law, but nobody seems to understand this, as you could still be arrested.
The KKK can denounce blacks/jews/minorites (or anything that falls under their wide scope of hatred), but they cannot supply information that has the explicit intent to cause harm to anybody (even those that share their views). The same goes for Black Panthers/Nationalists, or any other person or group. Another example of this would be the Anti-Abortion/Pro-Life website (I forgot the name-it was awhile ago) that posted the names, photos, home addresses, business addresses, telephone numbers and other personally descriptive information with the intent of having other people, even on their own accord, of bringing harm against them, their families, employees, and businesses. The court order removing the information from the website, and the arrest of the individuals was challenged and defeated (on the grounds that it vilated the First Amendment), since it was intended to cause harm to the individuals mentioned.
The Government is attemting to prohibit the disclosure of information that violates international by denying human rights. To allow the disclosure of such information actually violates international law by aiding in the violation of human rights. Since the right of Free Speech does not apply to commercial entities, the Government can restrict what is said to foreign governments.
"and here is the fun part, the very fact that they are telling a commercial entity or citizen that they cannot restrict somebody's speech, is in-fact, restricting their speech."
-Again, the Government can restrict what it's citizens say. It an also restrict what is said by commercial entities and groups. I'll bet you would have a very hard time giving millions of Social Security numbers of American citizens in Mexico, since the only use could be for illegal operations in "creating" new identities for illegal immigrants, with harmful repercussions for American citizens. (The Mexican Government has explicitly stated that they are helping immigrants illegally enter the U.S. - No joke.)
Not really twisted, just an idea that will keep American companies with massive amounts of personally identifiable data from disclosing it knowing that it could be used to bring harm and human rights violations against other human beings by foreign governments.
P.S.: I trust you are not accessing SlashDot from Big Brother's computer!
From the article: "It does not require a large primary mirror or lens, though it does use a smaller secondary mirror and lens."
So it *DOES* use a LENS AND MIRROR to focus light. Honestly, when will journalists, and scientists, stop making claims that are obviously NOT true?!?
"Any suggestions for effective ways American citizens can push against this legislation?"
Yup. It's called "Plenty of rifles and ammunition to go around". So far, it's worked pretty well: Nobody has taken my computers, or other things.....at least while I'm still alive. The RIAA and MPAA are more than welcome to try.
For those who do not feel inclined to use deadly force against Big Brother, you can always rip and download from a WiFi network. If you actually *do* get caught, you can always say that you ripped the music from a CD and then threw the CD away, therefore the music you have on your computer is the copy you purchased, albeit in a different form (there is no law that says electronic music is illegal). A song in electronic form is just the same song as if it were in audible form: You still purchased it and then either converted it to either electronic form of audible form. Also, keep your audio/video files on a different, removable, encrypted hard drive. The drives that have features that destroy data and become an empty drive if an incorrect password is entered are fantastic. Also, rent and rip DVDs personally, so you can avoid hiden embedded code.
Another tip is: DO NOT UPLOAD. Yes, I know file sharers will hate me for saying that, but that is where the copying and infringement take place.
In Soviet Russia, The Party always finds YOU!
In America, the party can't find you, and your family still gets billed for it.
I already have a "Consumer Ethanol Appliance":
It's called a Beer Bong.
"Contract with specialist services".....
Smells like the leavings of a lobbyist.
Interestingly enough, its amazing how much the government wants to regulate our lives, but dosn't wan't to pay for it, and make us foot the bill in order to comply with their whims..... Whims that are conjured up by some of the most power hungry, ass-backward, demented, half-witted individuals on the planet. This is another case of placing blame where it doesn't belong. You have the right to do business with anybody, and you cannnot control what they do with your product. What if a gas station sells an adult a cigarette lighter, who uses it to light the fuse on a bundle of dynamite that blows up a courthouse? I hope there are companies that openly denounce and refuse to cooperate.
What's next? A 10 day waiting period for a replacement propane tank for my BBQ?! How about a background check every time you fill your car up with gasoline? This is utterly ridiculous. Seeing as how pretty much EVERYTHING in existence can be used for some form of malfeasence, this makes everybody liable for just about everything.
The only thing that I would support is *HEAVILY* fining companies that do business with known spammers.
I can already hear it.....
Steve Ballmer: "Office 2007 is a work in progress....."
Another case of a company not listening to everybody else and continuing to think that it's products are better than they are.....
Ballmer and Gates need to realize that Vista just plain sucks. The big brouhaha surrounding it should be a big enough clue.
If Microsoft just stopped and listened to what customers were actually saying about Vista, and what they really want (instead of Gates and Ballmer deciding what customers want), and delivered something that was what CUSTOMERS ACTUALLY WANTED, they have the money and resources to create something that could be TRULY AWESOME.
Microsoft has blatantly ignored the fact that customers:
1) DO NOT want bloat.
2) DO NOT want eye candy.
3) DO NOT want product tie-ins.
4) DO NOT want compatibility problems.
5) DO NOT want compatibility problems to be routinely blamed on something other than Vista.
6) DO NOT want security problems.
7) DO NOT want spyware.
8) DO NOT care about flashy lights and fancy bells and whistles.
9) DO NOT want an OS with a mind of its own.
10) DO want a fully-functional OS.
11) DO want a GOOD BROWSER (IE sucks. Believe it.)
12) DO want to use product other than Microsoft's.
13) DO want an OS without so many goddamn problems as Vista.
14) DO want Microsoft to own up to its shortcomings and FIX THEM.
15) DO want a secure browser.
16) DO want a secure OS.
Of course, Ballmer and Gates continue to think they they "know what's best" for the customer, and that we have no clue what we want.
Vista is a work in progress just like a bowel movement is a work in progress.
Go go Gadget Arms! No! I said Gadget ARMS, not Gadget Copter!
I remember watching a video about a guy who shot homemade rockets, trainling a long thin wire, into thunderclouds. Pretty cool.
Apparently, the exhaust and the wire both triggered lightning strikes that traveled down the wire and/or exhaust plume to the ground.
Pretty neat.
It's all the White Man's fault.
Wow..... You've just discovered a huge conspiracy! Videogames are a part of Whitey's evil plan to keep Blacks poor, along with gold teeth, chrome-plated automobile parts, powerful stereo systems, and expensive jewelry. I assume you've already heard about the successful Communist plot to corrupt American Democracy by flouridating water, right?
BTW, who you play as in a videogame doesn't make you a racist. How many white/asian/black gamers play black athletes in sports games? What about Grand Theft Auto? Mortal Kombat? Double Dragon? Would a black gamer be just as racist for playing a black athlete in a sports game? What about an asian playing an asian in Mortal Kombat?
What do you suggest next? "Affirmative Action/Rebranded Racism" laws for the videogame industry? "Race Quotas"? A Jesse Jackson march? The "Race Card" has been played out. People aren't buying that excuse any more, and it's hurting the "issue" more than helping it. Obviously, it's a non-issue, since black gamers keep buying and playing those games.
Oh, and you say "nothing in the world happens without a white man"? So I guess that Martin Luther King, Condolezza Rice, Harriet Tubman, Nelson Mandela, Tiger Woods, Jesse Owens, Ricky Henderson, Thurgood Marshall, Clarence Thomas, Hank Aaron, George Washington Carver, Oliver Brown, and Kofi Annan never existed? How did Barack Obama become a front-running Presidential candidate if he doesn't exist?
Racist T.V. shows you say? How about Family Matters, Moesha, Sister Sister, Fat Albert, The George Cosby Show, The Black Kings Of Comedy, Sanford & Son, The Fresh Prince Of Bel Air (show about rich black people), Keenan & Kel, and BET? I don't hear you complaining about the racism of historically black colleges (almost all black student body), the NBA and NFL (There are far more black players than white ones), or the NAACP (putting black causes ahead of everything else). Is that kind of racism o.k. because they aren't about white people?
Next time you decide to post some "The World Is Racist And All Against Blacks" drivel, take a page from Martin Luther King..... Think before you speak.
Does anybody have the number of the patent that Boeing is referring to?
Worst.....Patent.....Ever.
The United States is becoming more and more a Nanny State.
What's next? Lessons on:
Not talking with your mouth full?
Not running with sharp objects?
Not teasing animals?
Eating all of your vegetables?
Not farting in elevators?
How to blame other people for your own stupid actions?
I know this sounds harsh, but protecting people from themselves is like 'Reverse Evolution'. If they are too stupid to make the right choice, which is unbelievably SIMPLE, then why the hell should they contaminate the gene pool? I mean, why should I have to put up with the knee-jerk and bleeding-heat 'think of the children' laws whenever somebody makes a bad choice?
It's kinda like that retard in Chico, CA. Matthew Carrington wanted to get into a fraternity, so he chugged gallons of water because he answered trivia questions in a VOLUNTARY hazing ritual wrong, while doing calisthenics. Of course, when he inevitably died as the result of his own actions, his mother, who couldn't accept the fact that her "intelligent" son died wholly as the result of his own stupid choices, blamed everybody else for his death. He had every chance to say 'NO', but was to dumb (yet he got into Chico State) to figure it out. His fault entirely.
Here is a law idea: PROTECT US FROM KNEE-JERK LEGISLATORS, AND MAKE STUPID PEOPLE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS, AND NOT EVERYBODY ELSE!
The underwire in a push-up bra also acts as an antenna for lie detection.....
(GASP!) You LIED to me!
Ya know, it would hilarious if someone turned this around and made a parody of the DMCA by changing the lyrics and setting it to the tune of "YMCA".
As much of a copyright violation that it may seem to be, it would still be *VERY* Fair Use, since it would be a parody.
The genes that you would want to look for would be:
1) The gene that causes excessive stomach gas,
2) The gene that causes pyromania,
or
3) The gene that causes a small penis
If you find those genes genes, I belive you will find the answer to your question.
There is something like that here in the U.S......
When I got my first credit card, I wrote "Check Photo I.D." in the signature box so that the cashier did the 'signature check that they were supposed to do, they would be reminded to check the photo I.D.. This ensured that all blame would fall on the merchant for not sufficiently verifying the identification of the person trying to pass the card. If a merchant simply accepts the card, and the info it contains, and fails to verify that it is valid, then the problem of fraudulent charges becomes the problem of the merchant/retailer.
If someone reports a fraudulent charge, they can always ask the merchant if a valid I.D. was checked and verified. Obviously, the answer is 'no' (if they saw 'yes' then the are lying, and that is a whole new problem for the merchant), and the merchant has to take responsibility for the charge.
There is always the possibility that the customer is lying, but, there are other ways to tell if the merchant is lying, or telling the truth (such as signatures and CCTV).
I will now be taking bets on how long before mob goons put an axe through the computer, tie it to a chair, and throw it into a river.....