Recently health care laws were changed to designate that adults up to 28 are dependents to their parents if so chosen.
I'm pretty sure you can't just chose to have a 28-year-old be your dependent. There's usually some sort of requirement that they actually be dependent on you, such as living in your household. The reason that you can have a dependent that's over 18 (and therefore legally an adult) is that most college students, and many recent graduates, do not yet have enough income to establish their own household.
Democracy doesn't mean the tyranny of the majority should run unchecked.
If you use a strict definition of democracy, then yes, it actually does mean that. That's why all of the nations that we call democracies aren't "true" democracies, but constitutional governments (usually representative democracies).
1. Smartphone
I want to ditch AT&T and would like something that is as flexible as my older generation jailbroken iPhone. (VNC, Strong developer base, etc)
The Nokia N900 is nice. You can get one from Newegg for $500, and T-Mobile plans are $20/month cheaper if you don't get a subsidized phone and a contract, so it's pretty much a free phone over the normal two-year span if you can handle the upfront cost. The screen is almost as good as the new iPhone at 800x480, has X Terminal installed by default, and a VNC viewer is available in the repository. If you use x11vnc on the server side, though, you'll need to use the -skip_dups option. I haven't had to enable root on mine, but I believe it only takes one command (which is actually documented and supported by Nokia) in the terminal.
And having Ron Paul's son running for a seat doesn't make for a "Paul Dynasty". The names after that are even less well-known. The only ones in that list that can reasonably be called political dynasties are the Kennedy's (who seem to be fading from politics these days) and the Bush's.
Why couldn't the exact same arguments for legalizing gay marriage be used to legalize polygamy?
The only purpose to government-endorsed marriage is that your spouse has certain legal rights, one of the most important being the right to make medical decisions on your behalf. The issue that polygamy introduces that gay marriage does not is that there would be multiple people with the same legal authority, which means you have to create some way of resolving differing opinions among the spouses. This is the same reason that the argument that gay marriage will lead to people being allowed to marry their pets fails; your dog and your sheep are not capable of making medical decisions for you.
Or the exact same arguments for legalizing marijuana be used to legalize any drug?
The medical effects of marijuana, heroin, and cocaine are all pretty well understood. It isn't difficult at all to recognize the different levels of danger in each one.
I was trying to find a good way to word it, and obviously I didn't succeed. I wasn't trying to say that there's anything explicitly in the United States constitution about it. My point was that that's one of the reasons you have a constitutional republic instead of a straight democracy.
Er no, speaking out our mind is one thing we can do, and it has a effect. The only disruptive behavior I'm advocating is dialog.
Dialog is fine, I just don't think it works very often. I wish it did, but unfortunately, it's near impossible to cure stupidity. Cable news is a good example of what happens when you try to force dialog between two sides that have no interest in dialog.
Except it is not really just "assholes" we are also talking about old ladies that none the less vote against the rights of gay people to live together
Personally, I don't think that's an issue that should be voted on. Part of the purpose of having a constitution is to prevent the tyranny of the majority destroying the rights of the minority. This isn't strictly about religion itself, but about forcing your religious beliefs on others, especially through the secular government, which I strongly oppose.
and teach their grandsons that God created every animal separated and that evolution is a lie made by the devil, supported by Satanists.
Unfortunately, there isn't much you can do about this one without venturing into the territory of your first point. Face it, a lot of people are stupid. They'll always believe that Jesus, the magical free market, or the People's Communist Party will somehow save them, and no amount of logic or debate will convince them otherwise. When they try to force their beliefs on others, you can step in and tell them no, their rights do not trump the rights of others. If they keep to themselves, though, you can't do much without becoming exactly what you're trying to eliminate.
The capitalist response is that high prices force people to conserve, and the extra money gets poured into new ways to gather that resource.
That's also rather idealistic. In most cases, the scarce resource goes to the people with the most money, who pay other people that have lots of money for that resource, then they get together for an expensive lunch and talk about other ways to fuck the poor.
Your argument applies to pretty much every large group of people. I think that it's a larger issue in politics than in religion. I'm not saying that you're wrong- I agree that more moderate, reasonable people should step up and denounce the extremists- but it's certainly not something that's restricted to religion.
How many atheists are known to have started religious wars and tried convert entire countries or kill them if they wouldn't convert?
As someone else has already said, several Communist dictators. After reading the comments here on Slashdot, I can easily imagine a few of the people that have posted using violence to eliminate all traces of religion from the world. South Park also had a couple things to say about it.
Almost all religion is focused on the fear of death. Hell, look at some of the most famous Bible quotes, and you'll see that they almost all refer in some way to continuous life after death.
I'll tell you why - the magical mystical god of the various books is hugely inconsistent and fails the basic logical challenges a scientific analysis demands.
Human beings are hugely inconsistent in their behavior. By your argument, human beings must not exist.
The OT is part of the bible and is part of the basis of Christianity. Being a Christian REQUIRES one to believe the OT
How many Christians have a nice ham dinner on Sundays? I'm pretty sure the Torah has a thing or two to say about that. Most Christians only bring up the Old Testament when it's convenient for them; see also Why Can't I Own a Canadian?
It is an exercise in altering religious views to conform to modern science
Some religions are okay with this. Not every religion says that what was written a couple thousand years ago is the unchanging truth of everything in the universe. Not every religion denies the obvious fact that our understanding of the world is continuously improving. A few religions have been this way for a thousand years.
While the existence of an all-powerful deity or deities is not falsifiable - a hell of a lot of conclusions that people come to based on that premise are. When the actions they take because of those conclusions are destructive then they do need to be opposed.
Which isn't really opposing religion, but opposing assholes, and that's something that should be done regardless of religion.
That would make sense if a few loud and obnoxious religionists weren't Hell bent on forcing religion back into aspects of culture we've been successfully removing religion from in the first place.
I haven't had any problems with the display on mine. Every once in a while, the touchscreen will go unresponsive for a few seconds, but I'm not really sure if that's just the web browser or Internet connection. They also released a new version of Maemo a couple days ago, and I haven't played with it enough yet to see how much has been fixed.
I don't believe the N900 is being sold through any of the carriers in the US. My guess is because it's even harder to lock down than Android. I bought mine from NewEgg and just brought it in to a T-Mobile shop to get a SIM card. I've been mostly happy with it so far, though my previous phone was a Samsung flip phone from 2006, so I don't have much experience with other current phones. The nice thing about getting service from T-Mobile for it is that it's $20/month cheaper than the plans that include a subsidized phone, so in exchange for the up-front cost (I paid $550 a few months ago, NewEgg has it for $500 now), I'll save a little money over the course of 2-3 years.
Yeah, the wording for claim 28 is pretty funny. I will give them credit for having plenty of claims for an apparatus. You certainly can't complain that the only physical device in the patent is a generic computer.
Nah, that's okay. I don't really care enough about it to do any more than discuss it a bit, since I couldn't really care less about DDR or Guiter Hero. I was just curious if they had a patent on the general concept of the game, on some specific aspect of it, or on the hardware that goes with it. Regardless of how valid the patent might be, "Method for instructing a person to dance" is a hilarious title.
Are those patents about the gameplay, or about the hardware (or software, I guess) involved in the game? I don't actually know myself, and I'm too lazy to look it up. You could patent the plastic guitars and drum sets without being able to patent the game concept of "using fake instruments to play along with a sound track"
Slashdot Mirror
Recently health care laws were changed to designate that adults up to 28 are dependents to their parents if so chosen.
I'm pretty sure you can't just chose to have a 28-year-old be your dependent. There's usually some sort of requirement that they actually be dependent on you, such as living in your household. The reason that you can have a dependent that's over 18 (and therefore legally an adult) is that most college students, and many recent graduates, do not yet have enough income to establish their own household.
Democracy doesn't mean the tyranny of the majority should run unchecked.
If you use a strict definition of democracy, then yes, it actually does mean that. That's why all of the nations that we call democracies aren't "true" democracies, but constitutional governments (usually representative democracies).
1. Smartphone I want to ditch AT&T and would like something that is as flexible as my older generation jailbroken iPhone. (VNC, Strong developer base, etc)
The Nokia N900 is nice. You can get one from Newegg for $500, and T-Mobile plans are $20/month cheaper if you don't get a subsidized phone and a contract, so it's pretty much a free phone over the normal two-year span if you can handle the upfront cost. The screen is almost as good as the new iPhone at 800x480, has X Terminal installed by default, and a VNC viewer is available in the repository. If you use x11vnc on the server side, though, you'll need to use the -skip_dups option. I haven't had to enable root on mine, but I believe it only takes one command (which is actually documented and supported by Nokia) in the terminal.
And having Ron Paul's son running for a seat doesn't make for a "Paul Dynasty". The names after that are even less well-known. The only ones in that list that can reasonably be called political dynasties are the Kennedy's (who seem to be fading from politics these days) and the Bush's.
Which, of course, requires visually estimating that your speed is approximately equal to that of the target vehicle.
Telling whether or not an object is getting closer to you is not very difficult. It's an ability that evolved in animals several million years ago.
Why couldn't the exact same arguments for legalizing gay marriage be used to legalize polygamy?
The only purpose to government-endorsed marriage is that your spouse has certain legal rights, one of the most important being the right to make medical decisions on your behalf. The issue that polygamy introduces that gay marriage does not is that there would be multiple people with the same legal authority, which means you have to create some way of resolving differing opinions among the spouses. This is the same reason that the argument that gay marriage will lead to people being allowed to marry their pets fails; your dog and your sheep are not capable of making medical decisions for you.
Or the exact same arguments for legalizing marijuana be used to legalize any drug?
The medical effects of marijuana, heroin, and cocaine are all pretty well understood. It isn't difficult at all to recognize the different levels of danger in each one.
Most of Boston's subway system uses third rails.
Er no, speaking out our mind is one thing we can do, and it has a effect. The only disruptive behavior I'm advocating is dialog.
Dialog is fine, I just don't think it works very often. I wish it did, but unfortunately, it's near impossible to cure stupidity. Cable news is a good example of what happens when you try to force dialog between two sides that have no interest in dialog.
Except it is not really just "assholes" we are also talking about old ladies that none the less vote against the rights of gay people to live together
Personally, I don't think that's an issue that should be voted on. Part of the purpose of having a constitution is to prevent the tyranny of the majority destroying the rights of the minority. This isn't strictly about religion itself, but about forcing your religious beliefs on others, especially through the secular government, which I strongly oppose.
and teach their grandsons that God created every animal separated and that evolution is a lie made by the devil, supported by Satanists.
Unfortunately, there isn't much you can do about this one without venturing into the territory of your first point. Face it, a lot of people are stupid. They'll always believe that Jesus, the magical free market, or the People's Communist Party will somehow save them, and no amount of logic or debate will convince them otherwise. When they try to force their beliefs on others, you can step in and tell them no, their rights do not trump the rights of others. If they keep to themselves, though, you can't do much without becoming exactly what you're trying to eliminate.
The capitalist response is that high prices force people to conserve, and the extra money gets poured into new ways to gather that resource.
That's also rather idealistic. In most cases, the scarce resource goes to the people with the most money, who pay other people that have lots of money for that resource, then they get together for an expensive lunch and talk about other ways to fuck the poor.
Your argument applies to pretty much every large group of people. I think that it's a larger issue in politics than in religion. I'm not saying that you're wrong- I agree that more moderate, reasonable people should step up and denounce the extremists- but it's certainly not something that's restricted to religion.
How many atheists are known to have started religious wars and tried convert entire countries or kill them if they wouldn't convert?
As someone else has already said, several Communist dictators. After reading the comments here on Slashdot, I can easily imagine a few of the people that have posted using violence to eliminate all traces of religion from the world. South Park also had a couple things to say about it.
Almost all religion is focused on the fear of death. Hell, look at some of the most famous Bible quotes, and you'll see that they almost all refer in some way to continuous life after death.
I assume you mean the New Testament?
That is a little idealistic compared to what Christianity really is in the US.
Which is why many of the "love"-oriented religious consider them to be bad Christians.
I'll tell you why - the magical mystical god of the various books is hugely inconsistent and fails the basic logical challenges a scientific analysis demands.
Human beings are hugely inconsistent in their behavior. By your argument, human beings must not exist.
The OT is part of the bible and is part of the basis of Christianity. Being a Christian REQUIRES one to believe the OT
How many Christians have a nice ham dinner on Sundays? I'm pretty sure the Torah has a thing or two to say about that. Most Christians only bring up the Old Testament when it's convenient for them; see also Why Can't I Own a Canadian?
It is an exercise in altering religious views to conform to modern science
Some religions are okay with this. Not every religion says that what was written a couple thousand years ago is the unchanging truth of everything in the universe. Not every religion denies the obvious fact that our understanding of the world is continuously improving. A few religions have been this way for a thousand years.
While the existence of an all-powerful deity or deities is not falsifiable - a hell of a lot of conclusions that people come to based on that premise are. When the actions they take because of those conclusions are destructive then they do need to be opposed.
Which isn't really opposing religion, but opposing assholes, and that's something that should be done regardless of religion.
That would make sense if a few loud and obnoxious religionists weren't Hell bent on forcing religion back into aspects of culture we've been successfully removing religion from in the first place.
Fixed that for you.
because Sun was acquired by Oracle.
Gee, I bet nobody predicted this joke.
I haven't had any problems with the display on mine. Every once in a while, the touchscreen will go unresponsive for a few seconds, but I'm not really sure if that's just the web browser or Internet connection. They also released a new version of Maemo a couple days ago, and I haven't played with it enough yet to see how much has been fixed.
I don't believe the N900 is being sold through any of the carriers in the US. My guess is because it's even harder to lock down than Android. I bought mine from NewEgg and just brought it in to a T-Mobile shop to get a SIM card. I've been mostly happy with it so far, though my previous phone was a Samsung flip phone from 2006, so I don't have much experience with other current phones. The nice thing about getting service from T-Mobile for it is that it's $20/month cheaper than the plans that include a subsidized phone, so in exchange for the up-front cost (I paid $550 a few months ago, NewEgg has it for $500 now), I'll save a little money over the course of 2-3 years.
Yeah, the wording for claim 28 is pretty funny. I will give them credit for having plenty of claims for an apparatus. You certainly can't complain that the only physical device in the patent is a generic computer.
Nah, that's okay. I don't really care enough about it to do any more than discuss it a bit, since I couldn't really care less about DDR or Guiter Hero. I was just curious if they had a patent on the general concept of the game, on some specific aspect of it, or on the hardware that goes with it. Regardless of how valid the patent might be, "Method for instructing a person to dance" is a hilarious title.
Are those patents about the gameplay, or about the hardware (or software, I guess) involved in the game? I don't actually know myself, and I'm too lazy to look it up. You could patent the plastic guitars and drum sets without being able to patent the game concept of "using fake instruments to play along with a sound track"