Kind of reminds me of the story of the architect who wanted to build what he thought would be a magnificent tower in Barcelona, Spain for the World's Fair in 1888, but the people there rejected it and said it was too ugly. So he moved on and decided to pitch it in Paris, France, for the World's Fair in 1989. Everyone in Paris said it was ugly too, but in the end they relented and decided to let him set it up, on the condition that it be taken down again once the fair was over. That ended up not happening, though, because it turned out to be too expensive to demolish.
Parisians' public opinion of the aesthetic and cultural value of Gustave Eiffel's architecture has changed somewhat since then. ;)
Re: Re: Whatever .. St. louis sucks and Missouri in general sucks
No, he advocates that people making bad decisions should pay more in taxes. There are still plenty of poorer, less educated people who don't smoke, and even though you do, unsurprisingly, statistically see people making really stupid choices more often among the less-educated segment of society, there are still also plenty of educated and wealthy people who do smoke.
Let's pause for a moment to contemplate the forward thinking nature of his statement. This was 1994: a good six years before Silicon Valley entrepreneurs began to swoop in and avidly embrace free software, rebranding it as open source in the doing.
Can we please back off on the rewriting of history? Those of us who lived through that period know better.
The Open Source Initiative was founded in 1998 by several developers, including Eric S. Raymond, who wrote the seminal paper The Cathedral and the Bazaar in 1997. The term "open source" was already in wide enough use at that point that no one was confused by his use of it in the paper.
The basic open-source concept of code being shared around freely for people to use as they wish, including incorporating it into proprietary software, is older still; it's been the natural state of software development ever since programmable computers first emerged from being a government-only project to something mere mortals could work on. It only had to be formally re-branded as "open source software" and presented by the OSI because of all of the damage that the FSF's extremism was doing to the image of non-proprietary software.
Today, open-source software has found wide acceptance and is used everywhere, whereas Linux, locked away behind restrictive FSF licensing and a user-hostile community who are stuck so far behind the times that they still think a command line is a user interface, languished in obscurity for decades, never finding acceptance outside of the server world, until Google built a proper user-friendly OS out of it, (going well out of their way to avoid GPL entanglements as they did so,) and the rest was history; today it's well on the way to taking over the world.
Re: Whatever .. St. louis sucks and Missouri in general sucks
Missouri's got a long history as the cesspool of the Midwest. Not only was it a slave state back in the day, this is the state where it was legal for nearly 140 years to kill Mormons, in open defiance of the First Amendment and basic due process. (Sure, at the end it was more of a "technically it's still on the books but don't actually do it" thing, but it did stay on the books that long, throughout most of the 20th century, and it was not that way at the start.)
Want to see people walking around in the middle of the freaking street for no good reason? Drive around anywhere in North St. Louis.
Well then their football team should feel right at home in LA. (Although down there they only do it at red lights; no one's crazy to walk around through moving traffic, but seeing people walking up and down between lanes of stopped cars is common.)
875(d) Whoever, with intent to extort from any person, firm, association, or corporation, any money or other thing of value, transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to injure the property or reputation of the addressee or of another or the reputation of a deceased person or any threat to accuse the addressee or any other person of a crime, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.
others rightly worry that trying to dictate who companies can and can't do business with is a troubling and ultimately fruitless affair.
Sounds more like a strawman than a "rightful worry" to me. It's not about who you can and can't do business with, but rather about what business you can and can't do (with anyone). Cisco should not be in the human-rights-violation business, not with China, not with any other country, not with any corporation or private entity.
Please remember that this is Hillary Clinton we're talking about here. She has all the baggage of being a Clinton, without Bill's charisma to balance it out. It's hard to think of a more unelectable candidate. Don't believe me? Keep in mind that she's tried this before, and got beaten in the primaries by a rookie candidate with minimal experience in politics.
Agreed. To see how little sense this makes, imagine filing a police report against someone for robbing a house, but refusing to say which house it was that got robbed, saying instead that you'd tell once it came to trial... and then somehow it actually did come to trial.
Second, T-Mobile keeps claiming that most users can't tell the difference between 480p videos and higher quality HD videos, but that's bullshit. In many cases the difference in quality is quite obvious.
Actually that's probably the most legitimat thing he said in the whole piece. People like to say how much better high-resolution video looks, but actual tests show time and time again that they can't actually tell the difference reliably. In fact, most people will consistently rate a lower-res video as higher quality than a higher resolution one, if the low-res one is displayed on a larger screen.