Comment Tinfoil! (Score 1) 151
I couldn't find any spare, so I had to use my hat
Now all I keep hearing is some Vogon poerty...
I couldn't find any spare, so I had to use my hat
Now all I keep hearing is some Vogon poerty...
Because of my political leanings, I tend to assume the worst about our friends in California but this is fantastic. Hopefully it catches on elsewhere.
LK
Moby Dick is fiction, but was highly influenced and factually informed by the tragic events and wreck of the whaleship Essex. Melville was consumed by the stories of the surviving crew, and was inspired by them to write Moby-Dick. It's a fictional work immersed in a strong, accurate nonfiction document.
The following book about the Essex is superb, for those with further interest. It won a nonfiction National Book Award. You will stay up very late reading it.
In the Heart of the Sea: The Tragedy of the Whaleship Essex, by Nathaniel Philbrick.
Concerts don't generally pack people into sealed areas with no provisions for leaving the venue(which in the case of the airline, is the plane at 35,000). As for cars, the same generally applies - as you can pull over to a safe area and exit in a speedier manner. Air travel has no such advantages, so a certain degree of comfort is expected at minimum - enough that people have no thought to warrant a diverted flight.
If you're going to be packed in a crammed space, cannot leave it, and it is not punitive in nature, it is a generally bad idea to do extra charges. That, and bad customer service might work for the bean counters that end up having enough status to escape their design, but not everyone is fortunate enough to have it.
After the bean-counters were allowed to design airplane layouts, they forgot about the people that had to sit in them.
Then people wonder why consumers want regulation in air travel to smack these practices down.
Now what would happen if nobody could hide economic development decisions, such as the relocation of companies between states? That is, that any decision to move, no matter how small or early, had to be publicly disclosed - and that all existing records had to be made public? That would anger thieving states like Georgia, who have no qualms about removing history from Northern states, while providing a chance for states to make an agreement.
Or, you can have the status quo, which encourages blood-feud between states.
On some level this sounds like playing dirty pool but it's really not... it's the exact same thing you would do if you had your employer behind the eight ball in salary negotiations: "Other companies are willing to pay me X for my skills, so why don't you match it or I will leave?"
Statistically speaking, that's a rare enough position that it is an exception. Besides, employers can do more damage with the same position over multiple people and jurisdictions - as they are favored by government over workers.
You can rationalize it all you want, but tax "avoidance" really is the same concept as tax evasion.
Moderation -1 100% Troll
Some people just need to take this person's advice before modding down truthful information.
If they have to throw everything and the kitchen sink to shut up critics, it doesn't look good for them.
Consider the deeds of professional victim-manipulators like:
Anita Sarkeesian, who can make a convincing, but fake, death threat on herself.
Chelsea Van Valkenburg, aka Zoe Quinn, who reached out many forums to clean out dissent - when she was called out on corruption.
Maya Felix Kramer, an individual that aided/abetted Ms. Van Valkenburg.
In addition, consider that various unrelated sites carried essentially the same message, "Gaming is dead", at about the same time. They won't allow anyone to say the truth or present evidence that journalistic integrity in gaming has died. All they permit is the party line - which supports these professional victims.
Crying "misogyny" won't help when people are calling them out on the real issue - their lack of integrity when it comes to developers and game journalism. Trying to shut critics up on multiple forums won't help to control the message - since nothing has stopped it.
Of course, this might not appeal to some, but modbombing this won't make the issue go away.
If you don't mind spending a bit more, there is the hummingboard which has a better USB implementation and options for gigabit ethernet/wifi/bluetooth. In addition, it runs more conventional distributions of Linux (iirc, Debian armhf).
Also, if you want to cheap out on compilers, GCC is a perfectly valid option on AIX.
The folks at Mozilla would beg to differ unless they're stopped NOTFIXing gcc on it.
Wouldn't mind if they would done their part to keep the slightly older, but still-viable CHRP systems in the loop. AIX is one thing, but dropping it from Linux just seems odd.
AFAIK, it seems like the only way you can still build for POWER3 is if you build the toolchain not to be crippled or go with a fully 32-bit system.
If you've not followed things, they've tried to drop anything below POWER4 for support. Perfectly fine POWER3-II's get arbitrary cuts.
Now that IBM's let Lenovo bastardize their x86 platforms, that only leaves the stuff that no normal person could hope to afford - POWER.
Perhaps they could come up with some entry point that doesn't have EOL written all over it.
We ALL know how Politicians get bought and sold so let's cut the "total" bullshit here.
Yes, they do. But not all of them and certainly not in the manner that the GP presented. One needs to actually understand how the system works before one condemns it and/or proposes fixes for it. Incidentally, most of the people in politics hate the system as much as you do. You think they enjoy spending so much of their day begging people for money so they can fund their campaigns? The real world isn't House of Cards, most people actually enter public service for noble reasons, ranging from the mundane fixing of potholes to the desire to advance a social cause. The problem is two fold:
1) Campaign finance reform is inherently suspect because it's passed by people who have an incentive to make it harder for incumbents to lose elections. There's a reason why opponents frequently referred to McCain-Feingold as the "Incumbent Protection Act"
2) Meaningful campaign finance reform would require a Constitutional Amendment; the idea I most liked was the notion of precluding private donations but giving every American citizen X dollars to allocate as they see fit. It's an awesome idea but one that's utterly unconstitutional. Perhaps you should start building a network for this concept rather than spouting talking points about money going into Senators pockets?
Modeling paged and segmented memories is tricky business. -- P.J. Denning