Comment Re:Tragic... (Score 0) 494
You, AC, get an "attaboy" for at least attempting to understand the situation. You didn't write enough to convince me that you REALLY understand, but you've made a good start.
You, AC, get an "attaboy" for at least attempting to understand the situation. You didn't write enough to convince me that you REALLY understand, but you've made a good start.
You're a complete idiot. Christians ran the colonies, and then this country for about 300 years. We didn't have any inquisitions. We had one witch trial that I'm aware of, and the CHURCH ITSELF moved to ensure that it wouldn't happen again. Complete fucking idiot.
Who gives a flying FUCK that the terms are offensive? WTF are you, a Muslim? Nobody gives a damn.
If you're NOT a Muslim, but instead, just another idiot bleeding heart liberal, maybe you should get a bit of education.
Or maybe there's not really all that much NEW stuff that can be done "with a computer" or "in the Cloud"?
It's just possible that the industry is entering maturity, and the only things left are doing the things it already does slightly more efficiently than the competition, rather than in a radically different way.
Note that the very early years of aviation included a lot of innovation, both in terms of capability and use-cases. But the airline industry has since pretty much settled down to "move people about long distances as cost-effectively as possible". Not much has really changed in a long time other than incremental improvements in aircraft efficiency....
Or did everyone really think that computers/cloud-computing/whatever were going to be new and rapidly changing forever?
The Secret Squirrels should not be monitoring all Americans. They should be tracking terrorists!
Great idea! Wonder why noone ever thought of that before.
So, any ideas about how to go about "tracking terrorists"? I'm assuming you're going to start by identifying some of them? And then you're going to do what, exactly?
No, there's not a whole lot of really good reason for warrantless (or even warranted) wiretapping of everyone. Nonetheless, security takes a bit more than "well, we should track terrorists!!!"
Note that the real question is more properly phrased as "how much liberty should we sacrifice in exchange for how much security?"
Everyone will have a different answer to that (mostly divided along "how much of YOUR liberty for MY security" lines. A small number of people will rephrase that as "how much of MY liberty for YOUR security", and an even smaller number will say "I'd rather have the liberty than the security, thank you".
Most of the latter group will, of course, change their minds the first time they lose a job for an extended period, but that's neither here nor there.
What is relevant is that the question won't go away. You can't have absolute liberty and absolute security at the same time. So finding a level acceptable to as many people as possible is essential.
And mostly done by guess and by golly....
However, the assertion that taking away the regulation will have better results than fixing the regulation is based on a fiction
Same old fallacy. Supporters of unlimited central government always try to claim that the only choice is all the regulation or none at all. Of course there is also such a thing as too much regulation, which causes more problems than it solves. So of course if a regulation isn't working, you just need a new regulation, and a new one to fix that, and a new one to fix that, until there are so many it becomes an albatross.
Anyone that thinks there are no regulations that need to be removed in the US has NOT been reading the Federal Register every quarter.
On iOS8 third party frameworks can now be dynamically linked (system frameworks could be as well, even before iOS8).
Holy fuck - who'da thunk of all that shit? Now I'm wondering how in the hell any of us over age 50 managed to grow up at all!
Stupid motherfucker, huh? Think about it. I can accomplish anything that you can, without the telephone. Now who's stupid?
You're at the mall, and want to look up specs? Big fucking deal - you're a spur of the moment shopper. You see some shiny gadget, you feel like you must have one. DUHHHH!! Already you're an idiot. BUT - let's just suppose that the shiny thing really is somehow unique or something. What I do is, I go home and research the damned thing on my DESKTOP WORKSTATION. See? I have the same functionality that you do, it's just sitting on my desktop. I don't need the instant gratification of looking it all up in the store.
Oh - once I''m sitting at home, that "impulse buying" thing is long behind me. I can also shop for similar devices online, locate the best specs, the best price, and order it for delivery right to my door.
You know, AC, I might have had a tiny bit of respect for your post, had you shown any respect at all. But, I'm a stupid motherfucker. Yeah, uh-huh. Here's a Kleenex - wipe some of that drool off your face, alright? Then, you can go sit in front of the window, and watch the dust motes floating in the sunbeam.
Bookmarking this site for social broadcasting mischief come next April 1st.
"Undressly is a place for people who enjoy undressing to connect."
I think this could be bigger than LinkedIn!
I dunno about that, all I have to do is look at southern califorina then remember that many homes have high to very high levels of lead in the drinking water.
Sounds pretty depressing tbh.
Probably the same reason most of us don't bother, because some yahoo has the article set to page them the second that someone edits it. They then jump up and down and revert it while throwing a hissy fit in the talk section.
We warn the reader in advance that the proof presented here depends on a clever but highly unmotivated trick. -- Howard Anton, "Elementary Linear Algebra"
