Whatever you need to tell yourself so you can continue to believe you're not a piece of shit, right?:) Yeah, I see you there, with your erroneous assumptions and logical fallacies. Pretty transparent.
It was cited as an example of other things that you can supposedly do but in practical reality cannot. Of course you can live without banks, cards, a home, a vehicle but who would choose that for themselves? I think it's probably safe to say the only people who live without those things have little choice.
So you have bank accounts, credit cards, a mortgage, a car, and no-one knows your SS#? I call bullshit. The law "protecting" you from divulging your SS# is like US income tax being "voluntary". It's fake. You cannot have a credit card, a home, or anything else without giving up your SS# unless you're filthy rich and can pay cash for everything all the time. And you cannot decline to pay your "voluntary" income tax unless you want to lose everything and go to prison.
It's an interesting idea, but the problem is most our troubles don't originate with ill-conceived or poorly-written laws -- those are just symptoms, not causes.
You obviously must live in mom's basement. If you don't give up your SS# you'll have to pay cash for everything all the time. You know, storing all your money at home and carrying large amounts of cash have some pretty big downsides, too. Not to mention there are plenty of things many of us do every day that can't be done (or can be done but at much greater expense) without a credit card.
Yes, the GPP's numbers are definitely off. We had astronauts spend four days each way on the moon missions, so it isn't quite as bad as that. I do recall reading though that a trip to the outer planets of our solar system with our current technology would leave the astronaut quite damaged by radiation. This is pretty old news, BTW, and TFS reads like some sci-fi fan just got his bubble popped after learning a few facts. Kinda cute, but on the front page of slashdot it just gives all the "/. == digg" complainers more ammunition. As if they needed it...
I don't think anyone can be qualified to judge that sort of thing for another person. Quality of life has everything to do with state of mind, and we can only know our own state of mind.
...you need to count WinME which came after 2K and sucked hairy donkey balls...
I know someone who insists on using only ME. He knows everything about it, and has it installed on a laptop and a desktop. All he does is simple web and email use, but he has to spend a couple of days every week resolving crises caused by his choice of OS. It's kind of like watching a drug addict, but without the money problems or physical deterioration.
I don't think implementing some choice backward compatibility via a wine-like scheme or vm is a bad idea though. Windows started as a GUI shell running on DOS, then it was basically ported to NT. There's really no reason microsoft couldn't take a bsd-licensed OS and modify it as Apple (via NeXT) did and end up with a winner on their hands. It could be that in a few years the only real objection left against windows is ideological. They certainly have the potential to deliver, so it won't surprise me if they finally do.
Just when I thought Bozo the used car salesman Ballmer might have actually earned keeping his job by bringing out Windows 7 nope, still a dumbass. Can someone fire him pretty please?
I'm surprised but happy to see there's one thing upon which we can agree.
You seem to think I have some sort of biological imperative to consume video. Nothing could be further from the truth. I choose what to watch from what's available legitimately, and have no problem with it. Video entertainment is nice to have, but it isn't so important that I need to risk legal trouble getting it.
I like to drive at speeds in excess of 100 MPH too, but I don't usually, and for similar reasons.
Apple's bubble won't last forever, and like Sony, they're building an army of haters and pissed off consumers that are fed up with the lock-in on their toys/phones.
The WSJ doesn't define reality, sorry. Yuppies had an image of themselves back then, some of them fancied themselves liberal. Nevertheless it was their appetite for quick, easy gains that fueled the whole foundation for the current housing swindle. Also you seem to have entirely forgotten that the first yuppies were the "traitors" of the hippie generation. Maybe you thought people like Seinfeld, Bill Clinton, etc were "liberal", but relative to how things really were in the '70s they were effectively all "right wingers" and "stooges of the man". How soon we forget...
Not everyone agrees that wanting a thing entitles one to that thing. That's the problem I have with your solution, frankly. Fighting injustice with a counter-injustice may feel good for awhile, but it doesn't generally work very well long term.
Probably there are lots of us who aren't willing to invest much time in collecting videos to watch, instead preferring to mostly stream what we can find when we have time. The other choices are either too time consuming, overpriced, or legally risky.
Great acting has never been the standard on ST (a science fiction tradition), though there's been at least one notable exception on each series. I thought Jerri Ryan, while obviously not an actor of the stature of Patrick Stewart, was overall a pretty good choice to play 7 of 9. The writers didn't do her many favors though (especially on that aging-rapidly episode).
Great actors rarely achieve their full promise while young. In that sense, women tend to be at a serious disadvantage in Hollywood.
I always remember Patrick Stewart for throwing that red shawl around his shoulders and asking, "Can I do this, or do I look like some sort of gay superhero?" in the film Jeffrey, as well as his roles as Picard and Captain Ahab. That man can seriously act.
Slashdot Mirror
Whatever you need to tell yourself so you can continue to believe you're not a piece of shit, right? :) Yeah, I see you there, with your erroneous assumptions and logical fallacies. Pretty transparent.
It was cited as an example of other things that you can supposedly do but in practical reality cannot. Of course you can live without banks, cards, a home, a vehicle but who would choose that for themselves? I think it's probably safe to say the only people who live without those things have little choice.
So you have bank accounts, credit cards, a mortgage, a car, and no-one knows your SS#? I call bullshit. The law "protecting" you from divulging your SS# is like US income tax being "voluntary". It's fake. You cannot have a credit card, a home, or anything else without giving up your SS# unless you're filthy rich and can pay cash for everything all the time. And you cannot decline to pay your "voluntary" income tax unless you want to lose everything and go to prison.
It's an interesting idea, but the problem is most our troubles don't originate with ill-conceived or poorly-written laws -- those are just symptoms, not causes.
You obviously must live in mom's basement. If you don't give up your SS# you'll have to pay cash for everything all the time. You know, storing all your money at home and carrying large amounts of cash have some pretty big downsides, too. Not to mention there are plenty of things many of us do every day that can't be done (or can be done but at much greater expense) without a credit card.
Yes, the GPP's numbers are definitely off. We had astronauts spend four days each way on the moon missions, so it isn't quite as bad as that. I do recall reading though that a trip to the outer planets of our solar system with our current technology would leave the astronaut quite damaged by radiation. This is pretty old news, BTW, and TFS reads like some sci-fi fan just got his bubble popped after learning a few facts. Kinda cute, but on the front page of slashdot it just gives all the "/. == digg" complainers more ammunition. As if they needed it...
I don't think anyone can be qualified to judge that sort of thing for another person. Quality of life has everything to do with state of mind, and we can only know our own state of mind.
I know someone who insists on using only ME. He knows everything about it, and has it installed on a laptop and a desktop. All he does is simple web and email use, but he has to spend a couple of days every week resolving crises caused by his choice of OS. It's kind of like watching a drug addict, but without the money problems or physical deterioration.
I don't think implementing some choice backward compatibility via a wine-like scheme or vm is a bad idea though. Windows started as a GUI shell running on DOS, then it was basically ported to NT. There's really no reason microsoft couldn't take a bsd-licensed OS and modify it as Apple (via NeXT) did and end up with a winner on their hands. It could be that in a few years the only real objection left against windows is ideological. They certainly have the potential to deliver, so it won't surprise me if they finally do.
I'm surprised but happy to see there's one thing upon which we can agree.
Yeah, and Republicans too!
You seem to think I have some sort of biological imperative to consume video. Nothing could be further from the truth. I choose what to watch from what's available legitimately, and have no problem with it. Video entertainment is nice to have, but it isn't so important that I need to risk legal trouble getting it. I like to drive at speeds in excess of 100 MPH too, but I don't usually, and for similar reasons.
:)
Maybe when you grow up you'll understand?
Typical irrational right wing asshat...
Thanks for confirming your troll cred.
They turned me into a newt! I got better...
Bitchin', put it on a t-shirt.
So, whatcha gonna buy with your astroturfer's allowance this week -- depilatory for your feet?
Also: The media may have dubbed Gary Hart "the Yuppie Candidate", but yuppies voted overwhelmingly Republican in 1984.
The WSJ doesn't define reality, sorry. Yuppies had an image of themselves back then, some of them fancied themselves liberal. Nevertheless it was their appetite for quick, easy gains that fueled the whole foundation for the current housing swindle. Also you seem to have entirely forgotten that the first yuppies were the "traitors" of the hippie generation. Maybe you thought people like Seinfeld, Bill Clinton, etc were "liberal", but relative to how things really were in the '70s they were effectively all "right wingers" and "stooges of the man". How soon we forget...
Not everyone agrees that wanting a thing entitles one to that thing. That's the problem I have with your solution, frankly. Fighting injustice with a counter-injustice may feel good for awhile, but it doesn't generally work very well long term.
Ah god NOOO, that's not the image I want with breakfast!
Probably there are lots of us who aren't willing to invest much time in collecting videos to watch, instead preferring to mostly stream what we can find when we have time. The other choices are either too time consuming, overpriced, or legally risky.
Great acting has never been the standard on ST (a science fiction tradition), though there's been at least one notable exception on each series. I thought Jerri Ryan, while obviously not an actor of the stature of Patrick Stewart, was overall a pretty good choice to play 7 of 9. The writers didn't do her many favors though (especially on that aging-rapidly episode). Great actors rarely achieve their full promise while young. In that sense, women tend to be at a serious disadvantage in Hollywood.
I always remember Patrick Stewart for throwing that red shawl around his shoulders and asking, "Can I do this, or do I look like some sort of gay superhero?" in the film Jeffrey, as well as his roles as Picard and Captain Ahab. That man can seriously act.
They need Viagrogaine -- gives you plenty of hair and what you need down there! What're you waiting for, loser?