rasmasyean
Apr 15, 08:40 PM
You don't care if Europe collapses? Not even a teensy bit that our allies are going to fail?
Not my words, hence the quotes
I think you either read the statistical trend wrong or perhaps read a twisted version of it from some "Christian blog" of some sort.
What's really happening is that the birth rate is "diminishing"...not "reversing". The trend throughout ALL 1st world and emerging economies is that the birth rate per person reduces. There are several factors for this including the fact that modernized civilizations do not need to have that many babies in hopes that a few will survive disease, famine, hardship, etc. And the few babies that do get born are brought up to be "more powerful humans" so to speak...in a sense that they are nurtured more and given more attention and education, etc. What happens is that the average "modernized person" can supply like multiple X more economic productivity than your average 3rd worlder. In addition, many more of those 3rd worlders will die before they have "fulfilled their usefulness" to society ... or perhaps even reproduce.
Think of it this way. If a person with a degree in industrial engineering can make a machine that spits out 10,000 donuts per day...how many "villagers" will it take to make an equivalent amount of food?
Not my words, hence the quotes
I think you either read the statistical trend wrong or perhaps read a twisted version of it from some "Christian blog" of some sort.
What's really happening is that the birth rate is "diminishing"...not "reversing". The trend throughout ALL 1st world and emerging economies is that the birth rate per person reduces. There are several factors for this including the fact that modernized civilizations do not need to have that many babies in hopes that a few will survive disease, famine, hardship, etc. And the few babies that do get born are brought up to be "more powerful humans" so to speak...in a sense that they are nurtured more and given more attention and education, etc. What happens is that the average "modernized person" can supply like multiple X more economic productivity than your average 3rd worlder. In addition, many more of those 3rd worlders will die before they have "fulfilled their usefulness" to society ... or perhaps even reproduce.
Think of it this way. If a person with a degree in industrial engineering can make a machine that spits out 10,000 donuts per day...how many "villagers" will it take to make an equivalent amount of food?
geniusj
Apr 4, 01:29 PM
So you would rather Deutsche Telekom just shut them down? You can't force them to run an unprofitable business..
T-Mobile USA is a profitable business. That information is readily available.
T-Mobile USA is a profitable business. That information is readily available.
b-rad g
Apr 26, 07:57 AM
Sure, put an Airport Express in every room with a set of speakers plugged in to each one and your done. Play music from your Mac, iPod Touch or iPhone to one or multiple rooms.
Happybunny
Oct 16, 03:50 AM
http://i694.photobucket.com/albums/vv310/happybunny2_photos/021.jpg
more...
zildjansg
Dec 1, 11:34 PM
Go Marvel!
Here's mine:
haaylaviit!can you share a link please?thanks
Here's mine:
haaylaviit!can you share a link please?thanks
OldSchoolMacGuy
May 2, 04:34 PM
In the Terminal, type:
defaults write com.apple.Safari WebKitShowsURLsInToolTips 0
Then press Enter. You will need to restart Safari for the change to take place.
defaults write com.apple.Safari WebKitShowsURLsInToolTips 0
Then press Enter. You will need to restart Safari for the change to take place.
more...
sinsin07
Apr 27, 08:19 PM
So since there is no answer to my earlier question, I take it that the posters who take issue with the tracking have not bothered to correct the issue on their phone and desktop, which would seem like they care more about posting complaints than being tracked.
WildCowboy
Oct 21, 06:53 AM
Nice...I've always loved that line in the license.
more...
Melrose
Feb 16, 07:06 AM
No ass and ugly legs? Terrible! :(
I would politely disagree with you. I have several of those wallpapers for that group.
They're hot. Period. Suck it up. :p
I would politely disagree with you. I have several of those wallpapers for that group.
They're hot. Period. Suck it up. :p
mr evil brkfast
Oct 30, 02:26 PM
you must be the only one who is not!
more...
mikeapple
Mar 31, 10:24 AM
with tens of millions of iPads sold... Adobe would be stupid not to work hard on making an intuitive powerful Photoshop app for the iPad... very Post-PCish is you ask me
kugino
Nov 29, 08:59 PM
Okay, I think $100k is a *little* excessive... and could encourage those who aren't as passionate about children to pursue a teaching job just for the money.
I think starting at $50-60k would be more than reasonable... I mean for only working 9 months out of the year plus receiving the benefits that teachers usually do... that'll sweeten the deal a lot. Especially in my field, physics, the way things are now I could either start as a teacher for $40k if I'm very lucky, or $50k+ in the industry. I'm just out of college and as poor as a rat... what do you think I would do? I'm not Mr. Materialistic or anything, but I have school and an apartment to pay for.
I think the real monetary incentive in teaching should be the bottom right corner of the matrix... those who have higher degrees and have worked for many years. It'll encourage people to be into teaching for the long-haul. However, that might introduce problems with ever-changing research on effective teaching styles, so maybe that isn't just a great idea.
Just some thoughts.
-Clive
you obviously haven't taught before, have you? for "only" working 9 months...the fact is, if teaching were a year-round gig, no one would do it. and i don't know what "benefits" you're talking about. someone once figured out that if you count all the out-of-school hours that teachers spend on grading, prepping, etc., many teachers are actually paid less than minimum wage.
i've always felt that not only are good teachers worth $100grand/year, but that kind of salary would make teaching competitive so that bright, enthusiastic, and promising individuals would have a reason to pursue teaching and not be turned off by the poor wages. yes, there will be some who pursue it strictly for the money, but if the wages are high enough, there will be increased competition for jobs and the good teachers will more often than not get the jobs. bad teachers or those who don't care about the kids are easy to identify.
my 2 cents...sorry for the OT rant.
I think starting at $50-60k would be more than reasonable... I mean for only working 9 months out of the year plus receiving the benefits that teachers usually do... that'll sweeten the deal a lot. Especially in my field, physics, the way things are now I could either start as a teacher for $40k if I'm very lucky, or $50k+ in the industry. I'm just out of college and as poor as a rat... what do you think I would do? I'm not Mr. Materialistic or anything, but I have school and an apartment to pay for.
I think the real monetary incentive in teaching should be the bottom right corner of the matrix... those who have higher degrees and have worked for many years. It'll encourage people to be into teaching for the long-haul. However, that might introduce problems with ever-changing research on effective teaching styles, so maybe that isn't just a great idea.
Just some thoughts.
-Clive
you obviously haven't taught before, have you? for "only" working 9 months...the fact is, if teaching were a year-round gig, no one would do it. and i don't know what "benefits" you're talking about. someone once figured out that if you count all the out-of-school hours that teachers spend on grading, prepping, etc., many teachers are actually paid less than minimum wage.
i've always felt that not only are good teachers worth $100grand/year, but that kind of salary would make teaching competitive so that bright, enthusiastic, and promising individuals would have a reason to pursue teaching and not be turned off by the poor wages. yes, there will be some who pursue it strictly for the money, but if the wages are high enough, there will be increased competition for jobs and the good teachers will more often than not get the jobs. bad teachers or those who don't care about the kids are easy to identify.
my 2 cents...sorry for the OT rant.
more...
BC2009
Apr 6, 12:10 PM
Only in this one:
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kC5MT2r5U8s/TDgkgLNj9aI/AAAAAAAAPgg/K9YfNYf51vs/s1600/DeLorean+time+machine.jpg
1.21 Petawatts!!!!!
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_kC5MT2r5U8s/TDgkgLNj9aI/AAAAAAAAPgg/K9YfNYf51vs/s1600/DeLorean+time+machine.jpg
1.21 Petawatts!!!!!
samiwas
Mar 4, 10:47 AM
Regarding Health Care:
Bill Maher New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a Profit (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-not-everything-i_b_244050.html) 23July09
Just how exaggerated is the following?:
Wow. That article pretty much sums up the way I see it all. Great read.
My problem with it isn't that businesses and people are in it for a profit (well, in certain areas). Hey, you got to make something. It's that the only thing that matters is the highest profit possible, at all costs.
If a company has made a profit of $15,000,000, but they were wanting $16,000,000 based on nothing more than their accountant's predictions, they won't settle for that $15m. They will lay off people, make others work longer, and cut salaries and benefits to achieve their "goal". It's no longer about making money...it's about making excessive money for the upper management and pleasing shareholders.
You see it in the stock market all the time. A company announces that it's profits will fall short of some astronomical assumed figure, and shareholders start selling off the stock because large profits are worse than huge profits.
While this isn't in the private market, and I'm sure someone (we know who) will find a way to say this is OK, it reminds me of a recent story I read. I think it was Texas Tech or something required all of their faculty to take a pay freeze, yet gave the football coach a half-million dollar a year raise. Not $50k, not $100k...$500k a year added to his already $1.5m a year salary. All while telling teachers there was not enough money to do anything for them. And it wasn't a contracted raise, if I recall, it was a "promise". The very fact that the coach would take that says enough to me. That's pretty sick.
Bill Maher New Rule: Not Everything in America Has to Make a Profit (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-maher/new-rule-not-everything-i_b_244050.html) 23July09
Just how exaggerated is the following?:
Wow. That article pretty much sums up the way I see it all. Great read.
My problem with it isn't that businesses and people are in it for a profit (well, in certain areas). Hey, you got to make something. It's that the only thing that matters is the highest profit possible, at all costs.
If a company has made a profit of $15,000,000, but they were wanting $16,000,000 based on nothing more than their accountant's predictions, they won't settle for that $15m. They will lay off people, make others work longer, and cut salaries and benefits to achieve their "goal". It's no longer about making money...it's about making excessive money for the upper management and pleasing shareholders.
You see it in the stock market all the time. A company announces that it's profits will fall short of some astronomical assumed figure, and shareholders start selling off the stock because large profits are worse than huge profits.
While this isn't in the private market, and I'm sure someone (we know who) will find a way to say this is OK, it reminds me of a recent story I read. I think it was Texas Tech or something required all of their faculty to take a pay freeze, yet gave the football coach a half-million dollar a year raise. Not $50k, not $100k...$500k a year added to his already $1.5m a year salary. All while telling teachers there was not enough money to do anything for them. And it wasn't a contracted raise, if I recall, it was a "promise". The very fact that the coach would take that says enough to me. That's pretty sick.
more...
louis Fashion
Apr 4, 02:48 PM
Let me get this straight. You upgrade your phone, will that not start the contract clock again? Won't the carrier get all their money back with the so called subsidy?
fox10078
Mar 21, 02:41 PM
I'm looking to get a grey card, The one I'm looking at says its for digital photography, Would it work the same for video? Link Below.
Any help is much appreciated
http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-Premium-Reference-Quick-Release-Photography/dp/B001G04VJO/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt
Any help is much appreciated
http://www.amazon.com/Opteka-Premium-Reference-Quick-Release-Photography/dp/B001G04VJO/ref=pd_sxp_f_pt
more...
techfreak85
Jan 2, 10:39 AM
alright! thanks! let us know if you have any problems or issues and we'll try to help you out.
we just got passed by another team, so we are now #61. and we will get passed again in less than a month. we have got to get more people involved!
Or current people getting bonus points. I'm busy today, but maybe I could write up something tonight, time permitting.
we just got passed by another team, so we are now #61. and we will get passed again in less than a month. we have got to get more people involved!
Or current people getting bonus points. I'm busy today, but maybe I could write up something tonight, time permitting.
Spooner83
Apr 7, 05:12 PM
WTF, what about gestures for the iPad!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!?
jozeppy26
Feb 11, 03:09 PM
I simply want to keep my voice plan the same and choose the new M2M. The M2M feature shows up under our family unlimited messaging thus I was assuming and hoping the voice plan rollover mins would remain unchanged.
I didn't lose any of my roll-over minutes. I have ~1200 and am on the 450 individual plan.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y285/Jozeppy26/att-1.png
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y285/Jozeppy26/att2.png
I didn't lose any of my roll-over minutes. I have ~1200 and am on the 450 individual plan.
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y285/Jozeppy26/att-1.png
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y285/Jozeppy26/att2.png
whatever
Nov 20, 02:15 PM
Wow, that is one nasty Danish mockup. I hope it won't look like that.:eek:
http://www.baekdal.com/images/articles/iphone.jpg
Here's actually a nice touchscreen iPhone mockup:
http://static.flickr.com/106/299323271_8625bfb1c6_o.jpg
I've been in many debates with people about the iPhone and I've always been on the side that Apple just shouldn't do one. Everyone always says that it would sell like hot-cakes because it would be an Apple phone, but my stance has always been that it would have to run on a particular carrier.
But lately I've been thinking about this and what if Apple bucked the system a little. They made a phone which connected directly to your computer and you downloaded the correct carrier setting to. So if you used Verizon, all you had to do is in setup select Verizon or Sprint....
I feel that one of the big problems with mobile phones is the computer connectivity has always been an afterthought, mainly because they're not computer companies. But what if Apple created a new iApp which managed the phone (ran on both Windows and OS X), which made the connectivity easy. This is basically what happened with the iPod.
Would the carriers care that a generic iPhone ran on their network, maybe the stupid ones, but in the long they're lives would be easier, because they wouldn't have to market the phones, just their service (which is where they really make their money).
I also like the idea of using the click wheel to make a retro style digital-rotary phone. However, I doubt Apple would just display the numbers on the screen and not on the unit. So when in dial mode, you would spin the click wheel and the numbers, displayed on the display in a circle, would highlight the number that you were on and then click the center button on the click wheel to select. If you wanted to get really old school, you could have the rotary sounds come through the headphones. Or course you would still be able to dial by your address book or search through a downloaded version of the white or yellow pages (which would naturally sync into your phone whenever you charge it at home, via blue tooth or direct connection to your computer).
http://www.baekdal.com/images/articles/iphone.jpg
Here's actually a nice touchscreen iPhone mockup:
http://static.flickr.com/106/299323271_8625bfb1c6_o.jpg
I've been in many debates with people about the iPhone and I've always been on the side that Apple just shouldn't do one. Everyone always says that it would sell like hot-cakes because it would be an Apple phone, but my stance has always been that it would have to run on a particular carrier.
But lately I've been thinking about this and what if Apple bucked the system a little. They made a phone which connected directly to your computer and you downloaded the correct carrier setting to. So if you used Verizon, all you had to do is in setup select Verizon or Sprint....
I feel that one of the big problems with mobile phones is the computer connectivity has always been an afterthought, mainly because they're not computer companies. But what if Apple created a new iApp which managed the phone (ran on both Windows and OS X), which made the connectivity easy. This is basically what happened with the iPod.
Would the carriers care that a generic iPhone ran on their network, maybe the stupid ones, but in the long they're lives would be easier, because they wouldn't have to market the phones, just their service (which is where they really make their money).
I also like the idea of using the click wheel to make a retro style digital-rotary phone. However, I doubt Apple would just display the numbers on the screen and not on the unit. So when in dial mode, you would spin the click wheel and the numbers, displayed on the display in a circle, would highlight the number that you were on and then click the center button on the click wheel to select. If you wanted to get really old school, you could have the rotary sounds come through the headphones. Or course you would still be able to dial by your address book or search through a downloaded version of the white or yellow pages (which would naturally sync into your phone whenever you charge it at home, via blue tooth or direct connection to your computer).
glocke12
May 4, 05:36 PM
well then, what if he's right?
To quote someone else in this thread "show me proof", in terms of actual statements given under duress and the results of that information. Until you or I see that we are both really just hand-waving.
As for the guy in the video, he's really the only one out there that I have seen that is so vocal about the ineffectiveness of E.I. I suspect that he is either someone that:
a) Is just out to make a quick buck off his book;
b) Has a grudge;
c) Has remorse about things that he has done and is trying to make amends.
To quote someone else in this thread "show me proof", in terms of actual statements given under duress and the results of that information. Until you or I see that we are both really just hand-waving.
As for the guy in the video, he's really the only one out there that I have seen that is so vocal about the ineffectiveness of E.I. I suspect that he is either someone that:
a) Is just out to make a quick buck off his book;
b) Has a grudge;
c) Has remorse about things that he has done and is trying to make amends.
SchneiderMan
Apr 1, 03:41 PM
I feel all MacBooky :D
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2261/screenshot20110401at124.png
http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/2261/screenshot20110401at124.png
elephunkman
Jun 20, 12:49 PM
How about Ardmore?
likemyorbs
May 5, 10:42 AM
That doesn't make it right. Retribution, revenge, anger, fear etc are not good emotions. Try to overcome these basic desires.
I overheard someone on the bus say something like this-
"So Bin Laden committed an awful crime, no denying that. But in response the US imprisoned people without trial for years in Gitmo, tortured some of them for information, then shot Bin Laden when he was unarmed. They both seem pretty bad to me."
I can see where this view comes from. Many times I've heard Americans complain that Europeans "look down their noses at them" and "maybe they would understand when planes fly into some of their buildings". However, when the US response to a disaster is detention and torture what do you expect? The US has lost the moral high ground, and these human rights violations only serve to encourage more people to fight against the US.
It times of difficulty many governments bend the rules, and it is how the courts and the public respond that matters. In the UK we detained some people, but they started a court case and won. We had a report of MI6 feeding questions to Moroccan security forces to get them to get information out of someone. However, MI6 was tripping over itself to say they don't condone torture and the courts constantly ruled more information on the subject should be released.
Detention without trial and torture are the methods used by dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, and the world will always look down on the US government so long as they are used.
Guess the world will just have to look down on us then. The US actually has a pair of balls, and we do what we need to do, unlike Europe who's militaries are a joke. Shooting bin laden while he was unarmed?? Seriously?? Who gives a crap? That's like being against shooting hitler while he was unarmed. Of course your solution would be to put him in jail for the rest of his life, but that doesn't fly here. Again, we are not europe and never will be, thankfully. You guys could look your noses down at us, but don't forget who's going to be there protecting your asses when you get into a war with an arab country (and that is possible, remember they don't like you either, and you're an easier target than us). I'm sorry, but their needs to be at least one nation that does what we do, and i'm glad we do it.
Still too squeamish to call it torture? The fundamental difference between terrorist organizations and authoritarian regimes on the one hand, and the civilized world on the other, is the latter's unwillingness to have recourse to violence. Policies of torture are unbecoming of a nation of people who purport to uphold the US constitution, regardless of the extreme methods adopted by our enemies. Once we sink to their level, we lose all our moral superiority and become victims of our own hate and fear as much as victims of the machinations of our opponents.
Nope, not too squeamish just going by the thread title. It's torture, there you happy? Again, we are not europe. So europe doesn't torture and where has that gotten them? They still get attacked by terrorists, even sweden, go figure. Moral superiority or not, safety of our nation and other western nations is more important. If torture is needed to get that information and save thousands of lives, then we should do it. Someone has to do the dirty work, and it's always us. But that's ok, that's how it's always been and it's why we're such a proud nation.
I overheard someone on the bus say something like this-
"So Bin Laden committed an awful crime, no denying that. But in response the US imprisoned people without trial for years in Gitmo, tortured some of them for information, then shot Bin Laden when he was unarmed. They both seem pretty bad to me."
I can see where this view comes from. Many times I've heard Americans complain that Europeans "look down their noses at them" and "maybe they would understand when planes fly into some of their buildings". However, when the US response to a disaster is detention and torture what do you expect? The US has lost the moral high ground, and these human rights violations only serve to encourage more people to fight against the US.
It times of difficulty many governments bend the rules, and it is how the courts and the public respond that matters. In the UK we detained some people, but they started a court case and won. We had a report of MI6 feeding questions to Moroccan security forces to get them to get information out of someone. However, MI6 was tripping over itself to say they don't condone torture and the courts constantly ruled more information on the subject should be released.
Detention without trial and torture are the methods used by dictatorships and authoritarian regimes, and the world will always look down on the US government so long as they are used.
Guess the world will just have to look down on us then. The US actually has a pair of balls, and we do what we need to do, unlike Europe who's militaries are a joke. Shooting bin laden while he was unarmed?? Seriously?? Who gives a crap? That's like being against shooting hitler while he was unarmed. Of course your solution would be to put him in jail for the rest of his life, but that doesn't fly here. Again, we are not europe and never will be, thankfully. You guys could look your noses down at us, but don't forget who's going to be there protecting your asses when you get into a war with an arab country (and that is possible, remember they don't like you either, and you're an easier target than us). I'm sorry, but their needs to be at least one nation that does what we do, and i'm glad we do it.
Still too squeamish to call it torture? The fundamental difference between terrorist organizations and authoritarian regimes on the one hand, and the civilized world on the other, is the latter's unwillingness to have recourse to violence. Policies of torture are unbecoming of a nation of people who purport to uphold the US constitution, regardless of the extreme methods adopted by our enemies. Once we sink to their level, we lose all our moral superiority and become victims of our own hate and fear as much as victims of the machinations of our opponents.
Nope, not too squeamish just going by the thread title. It's torture, there you happy? Again, we are not europe. So europe doesn't torture and where has that gotten them? They still get attacked by terrorists, even sweden, go figure. Moral superiority or not, safety of our nation and other western nations is more important. If torture is needed to get that information and save thousands of lives, then we should do it. Someone has to do the dirty work, and it's always us. But that's ok, that's how it's always been and it's why we're such a proud nation.
No comments:
Post a Comment