Back in January 2006, he insisted that the new "supermissles" under development had nothing to do with American ABM systems:
"These missile systems don't represent a response to a missile defense system, but they are immune to that. They are hypersonic and capable of changing their flight path."
Yet he's changed his tune about that recently. It goes to show that in many countries, including Russia, foreign policy is often merely theater for domestic consumption. Europe shouldn't be concerned by this rhetoric.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will), but I seem to remember that Firefox had an option in its cookie preferences dialog that allowed you to restrict cookies to those set by the originating site. It's a nice option, as it marginally increases privacy, and probably should be on by default. But as of 2.0, that option is gone. It still exists in the about:config, but less-sophisticated users are stuck with the default "allow sites to set just about any cookie they want" setting.
One must wonder: why would the Firefox team remove that option? The only conspiracy theory I can dream up is Google's involvement...
First of all, you suggest that the OS market is controlled by an oligopoly, and then proceed to discuss it as if it is a monopoly. There's a real and functional difference, but you apparently can't be bothered to be consistent.
Second , an oligopoly exists only if the suppliers/manufacturers in the oligopoly are in collusion, particularly with regards to price. Do you really think that Microsoft, Apple, and Linux are in collusion? It doesn't look like my argument is the one that has been refuted.
Either you believe in the free market, or you do not. Microsoft has a right to price their product as high as they want, and Indian consumers have a right not to buy it - those rights are appropriately reciprocal. If you also assert that Indian consumers who don't like MS's pricing scheme are entitled to the software for free, then Microsoft should have the reciprocal right to force customers to buy their product. And I don't think anyone outside Microsoft's board room thinks that is fair or reasonable.
You'll probably be modded down soon, and rightly so. But I'll add this anyway: yes, there are numerous false rape accusations (by some estimates, as much as 40% of all rape reports are baseless). But rape does happen, so we shouldn't be so callous to make statements like yours.
They're obligated to put their stockholders interests at the top of their priority list. This, and the OP's more general statement, are common misconceptions. There is no such requirement in federal law, nor in any state's law that I know of, that the shareholders' interests must be a company's top priority. Such a statement may have been used to explain various layoffs, outsourcings, releases of toxic waste, and so forth, but it's simply false. One good counterexample is Costco, which publically and repeatedly states that their priorities are employees, customers, and shareholders, in that order.
You know what? Fuck you. Fuck you and your hysterical xenophobia. I'm fucking sick and tired of reading this sort of shit on a site that once contained passably intelligent discussion. You aren't exactly elevating the discourse either, you know.
...knowing that your products were banned from the State Department for some theoretical and highly unlikely exploit, while Microsoft Word continues to be used there despite a documented (no pun intended) security breach attributed to it.
Minor quibble: even the birthrate among native-born Americans is at the replacement level (approximately 2.1), so the US would maintain its population without immigration. In Europe, the fertility of the native population is less than 2 (much less in some countries like Italy).
Turns out I had taken a document, re-written it for my own words and submitted it to a friend for review.
That is generally considered to be plagiarism. It's not just words but ideas that can be plagiarized. If you didn't cite the source of the ideas (the document you paraphrased), then you are effectively claiming its ideas and information as your original work.
There's no way in hell the US would tolerate anyone other than Canada to be north of use because invasion of the US would be a cakewalk.
Any time I hear the term "cakewalk" in reference to a military action these days, I automatically write off the speaker as an idiot. Yes, I am lumping you with Bush and Rumsfeld.
There are countless volumes of Christian theology which represent excellent and intriguing rational thought. Perhaps you object to the kernel of faith common to them, which is by definition not rational.
And for that matter, any faith-oriented religion by definition has an element which is not subject to rational thought, and is not meant to be questioned. But neither they nor Christianity "forbid you to think."
the US has clearly shown that it can't be trusted in terms of international agreements.
Such as? Are you referring to the US refusal to uphold UN Resolution 1441? Oh, wait, that was continental Europe. Do you mean agricultrual tarriffs under the WTO? Wait, that was Europe again. Which international agreements were you referring to, then?
Slashdot Mirror
Yet he's changed his tune about that recently. It goes to show that in many countries, including Russia, foreign policy is often merely theater for domestic consumption. Europe shouldn't be concerned by this rhetoric.
Correct me if I'm wrong (and I'm sure you will), but I seem to remember that Firefox had an option in its cookie preferences dialog that allowed you to restrict cookies to those set by the originating site. It's a nice option, as it marginally increases privacy, and probably should be on by default. But as of 2.0, that option is gone. It still exists in the about:config, but less-sophisticated users are stuck with the default "allow sites to set just about any cookie they want" setting.
One must wonder: why would the Firefox team remove that option? The only conspiracy theory I can dream up is Google's involvement...
... if they make Erin Esurance a Jedi Knight. The animation style matches up.
First of all, you suggest that the OS market is controlled by an oligopoly, and then proceed to discuss it as if it is a monopoly. There's a real and functional difference, but you apparently can't be bothered to be consistent.
Second , an oligopoly exists only if the suppliers/manufacturers in the oligopoly are in collusion, particularly with regards to price. Do you really think that Microsoft, Apple, and Linux are in collusion? It doesn't look like my argument is the one that has been refuted.
Either you believe in the free market, or you do not. Microsoft has a right to price their product as high as they want, and Indian consumers have a right not to buy it - those rights are appropriately reciprocal. If you also assert that Indian consumers who don't like MS's pricing scheme are entitled to the software for free, then Microsoft should have the reciprocal right to force customers to buy their product. And I don't think anyone outside Microsoft's board room thinks that is fair or reasonable.
When my girlfriend pretends to be Wonder Woman in bed, can I be sued by DC?
You'll probably be modded down soon, and rightly so. But I'll add this anyway: yes, there are numerous false rape accusations (by some estimates, as much as 40% of all rape reports are baseless). But rape does happen, so we shouldn't be so callous to make statements like yours.
Let me know when I can download some tasty, nutritious iFood and I'll be all over it.
...knowing that your products were banned from the State Department for some theoretical and highly unlikely exploit, while Microsoft Word continues to be used there despite a documented (no pun intended) security breach attributed to it.
Minor quibble: even the birthrate among native-born Americans is at the replacement level (approximately 2.1), so the US would maintain its population without immigration. In Europe, the fertility of the native population is less than 2 (much less in some countries like Italy).
Turns out I had taken a document, re-written it for my own words and submitted it to a friend for review.
That is generally considered to be plagiarism. It's not just words but ideas that can be plagiarized. If you didn't cite the source of the ideas (the document you paraphrased), then you are effectively claiming its ideas and information as your original work.
Merely crossing the border does not constitute a successful invasion. Idiot.
There's no way in hell the US would tolerate anyone other than Canada to be north of use because invasion of the US would be a cakewalk.
Any time I hear the term "cakewalk" in reference to a military action these days, I automatically write off the speaker as an idiot. Yes, I am lumping you with Bush and Rumsfeld.
My advice to you: take a deep breath, have a nap, and don't get your geopolitical and economic outlook from [i]Soldier of Fortune.[/i]
Just... two... more... years...
There are countless volumes of Christian theology which represent excellent and intriguing rational thought. Perhaps you object to the kernel of faith common to them, which is by definition not rational.
And for that matter, any faith-oriented religion by definition has an element which is not subject to rational thought, and is not meant to be questioned. But neither they nor Christianity "forbid you to think."
At least, not as shocking as if businessmen had been using PS3s to buy homeless people.
the US has clearly shown that it can't be trusted in terms of international agreements.
Such as? Are you referring to the US refusal to uphold UN Resolution 1441? Oh, wait, that was continental Europe. Do you mean agricultrual tarriffs under the WTO? Wait, that was Europe again. Which international agreements were you referring to, then?
A crossbow as a home defense weapon? Now we know you're living in a fantasy world.
Oh, and Hannover... goodbye.
-1, Offtopic.
You could always take a look at VSIPL++, which is probably the next best thing (and a lot of fun as well).