I did the soft mod as well. Loading from a saved game was enough to get xbmc and the dashboard on your machine. It made a great emulator. i quick google search for the game and it was splinter cell. I'm almost positive I used a different game but regardless, it was incredibly easy.
By today's standards Reagan would be called a RINO.
This gets said allot but it's bullshit. He was pro-life, pro-military, as anti-communist as you could get. He did tax cuts for businesses. Heck, the term trickle down was made popular from his administration. He did agree to a one time amnesty but that was on the condition the wall get built - hopefully a trick that Trump doesn't also fall for.
If you want a party hero that would be opposite of what his party stands for today... take no look further than JFK.
It's perspective. Some call them conservative, some call them moderate, some call them liberals (by American standards - please refrain from the "they are extreme right for Europe), and some call them sell outs who will go against what they say they believe for some positive press.
If they are legally able to - glad you mentioned Texas since we did obtain that legality when we accepted statehood status - they should get the same number of senate votes.
It's part of the contract of representation guaranteed when becoming a state.
I think we just see things different. Based on what your writing, I'm assuming you feel like states are more an artificial line on a map and shouldn't get equal representation just for being a state. Otherwise, we wouldn't be talking about proportional representation (that's what the House is for.)
I just don't know if population count should be the sole decider on how to draw the map. In smaller states, it would give all the power to one or two cities.
I think the problem is how do you do it soley on population since areas are populated so differently? For the towns of 500-2000 that are a hundred miles away from two large cities, where do you put them? Here in Texas, do you combine some of San Antonio with Austin to get to your magic population number even though the demographics of each city is very different?
I'm sure it more complex than x number of people per district but it seems like there could be some formula and consistency across all states or at least for each state.
That said, I can see some easy troubles with this since states have difference population structures (and vastly different geographic sizes.)
If this was a one-person one-vote Country, Democrats would overwhelmingly hold the House, and Clinton would be President. But it isn't; as Republicans like to smugly remind us when it suits them, the US is a Republic, and some votes have more value than others
I don't think you understand the point. It's so 2 or 3 populous states don't decide the president. If your system was in place, the south and fly over country would have no say in the presidential election. In the EU, items pass by the majority of countries voting on an item. I believe that is how it works in the UN (outside of the separate veto power)
That only works if you are dumb enough to think that journalist have no stakes in elections. As you can see by watching any network, the reporting is slanted based on the reporter's or network's own beliefs.
Unless you think the government should be the ones to decide what news is fair and balance - which works great when it's your person in power.
The punishment should be for you never to buy Intel again and to look for a cloud service that offers what you are asking (which I doubt is really out there since it would make cloud services ridiculously expensive - each user getting their own processor. You might as well leave the cloud at that point.)
Wow. Don't like that BS label thrown back at your side, huh? Think how we felt for the past 8 years when that was thrown at us whenever we disagreed with Obama.
I know you can't see it, but Hall was trying to make that point
Pretty hard to support the arguments of Google et al. re Net Neutrality while this kind of nasty shit is going on. I fully appreciate the fine distinctions
They want to be the only ones (not the ISP) preventing you from using their service. I know you get the difference and agree that it feels very hypocritical on Google's part.
On the flip side, it helps Google's push for net neutrality from people who don't understand the issue https://slashdot.org/comments....
No. Obama is the most recent president so of course he is going to be what is compared to.
If you disagree with what Obama did, than own it. Show some consistency. And honestly, he's out of office so I don't understand why that would be hard for you to do. You aren't going to lose anything.
If you disagree with a policy only because Trump is doing it now instead of Obama, then take a look in the mirror and evaluate yourself.
Slashdot Mirror
I did the soft mod as well. Loading from a saved game was enough to get xbmc and the dashboard on your machine. It made a great emulator. i quick google search for the game and it was splinter cell. I'm almost positive I used a different game but regardless, it was incredibly easy.
Well I can check the back of my NES control deck box which shows Mom, Dad and Son.
Wow.
Well since they had the mom and not the daughter, I guess they had no problems with woman but hatted younger girls. Ageism at its worst!
Was every culture on the box? Just curious how far this discrimination goes...
What's that got to do with him as President?
By today's standards Reagan would be called a RINO.
This gets said allot but it's bullshit. He was pro-life, pro-military, as anti-communist as you could get. He did tax cuts for businesses. Heck, the term trickle down was made popular from his administration. He did agree to a one time amnesty but that was on the condition the wall get built - hopefully a trick that Trump doesn't also fall for.
If you want a party hero that would be opposite of what his party stands for today ... take no look further than JFK.
It's perspective. Some call them conservative, some call them moderate, some call them liberals (by American standards - please refrain from the "they are extreme right for Europe), and some call them sell outs who will go against what they say they believe for some positive press.
If they are legally able to - glad you mentioned Texas since we did obtain that legality when we accepted statehood status - they should get the same number of senate votes.
It's part of the contract of representation guaranteed when becoming a state.
I think we just see things different. Based on what your writing, I'm assuming you feel like states are more an artificial line on a map and shouldn't get equal representation just for being a state. Otherwise, we wouldn't be talking about proportional representation (that's what the House is for.)
Similarly, it's insane that people in Wyoming have four times the electoral voting power as New Yorkers. "
Should we take away their senator's as well and give them to New York?
I just don't know if population count should be the sole decider on how to draw the map. In smaller states, it would give all the power to one or two cities.
I think the problem is how do you do it soley on population since areas are populated so differently? For the towns of 500-2000 that are a hundred miles away from two large cities, where do you put them? Here in Texas, do you combine some of San Antonio with Austin to get to your magic population number even though the demographics of each city is very different?
I'm sure it more complex than x number of people per district but it seems like there could be some formula and consistency across all states or at least for each state.
That said, I can see some easy troubles with this since states have difference population structures (and vastly different geographic sizes.)
I'm not an online gamer but I'd be willing to bet a nickle that most gamers playing co-opt or competitive online games play at the same time periods.
Telling part of a story is not telling the story correctly. There was more than one state's rights issue back in the day my friend.
If this was a one-person one-vote Country, Democrats would overwhelmingly hold the House, and Clinton would be President. But it isn't; as Republicans like to smugly remind us when it suits them, the US is a Republic, and some votes have more value than others
I don't think you understand the point. It's so 2 or 3 populous states don't decide the president. If your system was in place, the south and fly over country would have no say in the presidential election.
In the EU, items pass by the majority of countries voting on an item. I believe that is how it works in the UN (outside of the separate veto power)
That only works if you are dumb enough to think that journalist have no stakes in elections. As you can see by watching any network, the reporting is slanted based on the reporter's or network's own beliefs.
Unless you think the government should be the ones to decide what news is fair and balance - which works great when it's your person in power.
The punishment should be for you never to buy Intel again and to look for a cloud service that offers what you are asking (which I doubt is really out there since it would make cloud services ridiculously expensive - each user getting their own processor. You might as well leave the cloud at that point.)
Yeah. Because Bush's religion, partentage, and intelligence was never criticized or questioned.
I guess it's possible you are subtley making Hals point but I kind of doubt it.
and you bring race into this?
Piss off.
Wow. Don't like that BS label thrown back at your side, huh? Think how we felt for the past 8 years when that was thrown at us whenever we disagreed with Obama.
I know you can't see it, but Hall was trying to make that point
Pretty hard to support the arguments of Google et al. re Net Neutrality while this kind of nasty shit is going on. I fully appreciate the fine distinctions
They want to be the only ones (not the ISP) preventing you from using their service. I know you get the difference and agree that it feels very hypocritical on Google's part.
On the flip side, it helps Google's push for net neutrality from people who don't understand the issue
https://slashdot.org/comments....
Thank goodness we have the EU to save Europeans from there own apparently severe naivety
If that is true, when are the US sanctions against Saudi Arabia announced?
You want us declaring war or starting conflicts on more of the Middle East
No. Obama is the most recent president so of course he is going to be what is compared to.
If you disagree with what Obama did, than own it. Show some consistency. And honestly, he's out of office so I don't understand why that would be hard for you to do. You aren't going to lose anything.
If you disagree with a policy only because Trump is doing it now instead of Obama, then take a look in the mirror and evaluate yourself.
Do I need an ID to purchase a gun?
Just saying... reporting a crime on google maps instead of the cops could land you in trouble
As long as they are talking about making voting more secure, they should add into the bill voter ID requirements