Ted Cruz is an extreme outlier. Everyone else in the Republican party hates him. Please don't take his dumb remarks as representative of anyone else.
Here is a quote [1] referring to how Mitch McConnell (Republican Senate Minority Leader, soon to be Majority Leader) handles nut-jobs like Ted Cruz:
"Mitch has very carefully, very methodically, very much under the radar, isolated Ted Cruz. He's kind of sealed him off like the body puts a sack around some foreign matter"
I believe that's how most Republicans feel about him. Cruz echoes the idiotic thoughts of a very very small minority. But, since they sound like such bizarre nut-jobs, they get media coverage.
"Please don't take his dumb remarks as representative of anyone else."
The GOP is masterfully adept at deciding on a set of talking points, getting them into the hands of key people in politics and the media, and then beating voters over the head repeatedly with it until the voters start repeating it back.
The Republicans just won the Senate back on the idea that Obamacare is the root of all evil. Watch them leverage that idea into every. single. thing. from now until 2016 (and beyond).
You give more credit than I would, especially about the recent election since the messaging was anything but coherent from the party leadership. I think the Scott Walker / Chris Chrissy feud is a pretty nice indicator of where the breaks lie. The GOP is basically a split party these days under one roof. I would expect at some point to get back to a single message, much as they did before.
Yes, Cruz is popular among the rank and file, but he is very unpopular among the leadership and media. He is a very good speaker and makes a fair number of good points. He is also very easy to soundbite-attack.
If you look at rhino369's comment https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8585565 you can see what many of the Republicans fear. The boogeyman of "fairness doctrine" has even been raised. If you are serious about net neutrality and brush aside the concern then you are not going to advance any issue.
I don't expect anything to advance on this issue. Its to mantra and flags now.
If someone would narrowly define a technical definition of what techs actually want for net neutrality, then I think you could a fair bit of Republican support. Particularly if it was phrased as keeping the fairness doctrine out of the internet. Never mention the poison phrase net neutrality.
There were much more issues than Obamacare for this election. Most of them with one underlying topic - gross incompetence of the federal government which managed to mess up multiple times both locally and abroad. Of course, since Democrats are holding the presidency and half of the Congress, they are held responsible for this. Obamacare is a part of it - the law was full of bugs and nonsense like 1099 provisions, its implementation was the regular disaster and as always, it was massively oversold, underdelivered and took more money and produced less useful effects and more unexpected conseqences then planned. But this is the way of Big Government and Obamacare is only one instance of it. Of course, Republicans used all the instances against the party holding the presidency - that's what opposition does. That's the only way to have a measure of accountability there.
Ted Cruz is incredibly popular and a frontrunner for the 2016 presidential nomination. If he isn't representative of the modern Republican party, who is?
Front-runners this early in the game have a very reliable tendency to implode before the primaries. Being the dark horse at this point in time is not a problem.
Obama had a 17% nod from Democrats two years before the 2008 election. It was all Gore, Edwards, and Kerry in that year.
I'm sorry, I think I'm going to need a citation for that "incredibly popular" claim. Or is it that I run in the more moderate circles, so I am unaware? Is he popular among everyone, or popular among tea-party nutter butters?
No, he's actually a harbinger of the more polarization trend evidenced by the Republican party. In short, I was a Republican, but then the party disassociated itself from the values and concepts that I enjoyed, so I no longer affiliate with them. Ted Cruz is a player...to deny that he raises a ton of money and motivation to vote for his causes / perspective is ignorant. Fortunately he's at least open about his distorted worldview, apple doesn't fall far from the tree, most psychological disorders are inheritable. Yes, I'd actually say Ted Cruz is mentally defective.
Please don't do this on HN. We don't need to politicize the issue among technical people; we can simply discuss the pros and cons on their merits. I, personally, don't care about political parties at all (they're a distinction without a difference, IMO).
Sorry. To me, it looked like the issue had already been politicized, and I was just throwing in a quick sarcastic remark. Didn't think it would be taken too seriously. I get your point.
Extreme liberals do not want "equal opportunity". What they actually want is "equal outcome in all circumstances", which is obviously never going to happen, not even under socialism/communism.
Mao certainly attempted something like this with land reform. But you have a good point that it was never really equal, as he was living it up in the Forbidden City while the poor were starving.
No, I meant that socialism/communism do not state, in their list of goals, "an equal outcome in all circumstances". This is not about hypocrisy, but about misrepresenting socialism and communism.
This would appear to imply that our needs are somehow 'diametrically' unequal. My experience has been that everyone needs roughly the same basic necessities.
Rockwell Collins (big avionics maker) has a good touch screen product line that has been gaining traction in the commercial aviation market. Rockwell Collins Pro Line Fusion:
http://www.rockwellcollins.com/prolinefusion/
Netflix is unusable on my Apple TV. I can't even get through a 20-minute TV episode without it dropping to sub-480p quality and/or stopping completely. I've never been able to figure it out. I have the latest generation Apple TV updated with the latest software. I have tried rebooting it, etc.
It's only a problem on my Apple TV. Netflix works flawlessly on my Playstation 3, iPad, iPhone, and PC. My ISP is a regional provider called Mediacom.
This is what did the trick for me. Update Apple TV to the latest version, unplug. Unplug the modem. Plug it back in, wait for it to come online. Plug in the Apple TV again. Wait for it to go online. Enjoy.
PS Amazon Prime Instant Video and Vudu have never given me any problems.
He didn't say anything about the quality of Windows RT / Windows Phone products. Sounds like he was just implying that they have a relatively small installed base compared to iOS / Android products. That's pretty hard to argue with.
But... this is not very important anyway. There's no reason to have a "brand loyalty" flame war. Arguing and flaming about this on the internet is not productive. Let's just have a practical discussion about how to target multiple mobile platforms.
If I was serious about writing a cross-platform mobile game, I would use some middle-ware like Unity, Unreal Engine, Cocos (yes there is a version for Windows Phone), etc. This takes care of the underlying differences between OpenGL ES and Direct 3D, so the developer can focus on the game itself and not worry too much about the rendering engine or graphics API.
If I was writing some other app that used OpenGL ES, I could still make a port for Windows Phone / Windows RT by using a wrapper for the graphics-specific code. Such wrappers already exist, and it is not too terribly difficult to roll your own if you prefer.
A lot of times, when you see a big game that is available on iOS, Android, AND Windows Phone / RT, usually they have done this:
- Use middle-ware as discussed above already
AND / OR:
- Write the majority of the logic in C++ (all of these platforms have ways of utilizing C++ code), and use a graphics wrapper that isolates the rendering code, so you can work with OpenGL ES or Direct 3D interchangeably.
In my mind, I think of Soylent as "food for people who don't like food". In the same way I think of Nickelback or American Idol as "music for people who don't like music". There are millions of these people worldwide. But yes, obviously this doesn't apply to 100% of all people.
I personally see food in two lights a necessity and a luxury. Most of the time it is simply a necessity and Soylent will do. The rest of the time it is a luxury and I'll go cook a nice meal or go to a restaurant.
Actually I like food a lot, it's just that health is more important to me than taste. After all, the pleasure we get from tasty food only lasts a moment, while the pleasure we get from having a healthy body and mind lasts a lifetime.
I agree with your main point that long-term health is very important, but I'm hoping you're not saying that healthy food and tasty food are mutually exclusive.
Because on the internet, and especially in internet comments, the world only exists in black and white. Something is either 100% true for everyone everywhere at all times without exception, or it is 100% false. There is no middle ground, and no shades of gray. Ever.
Haven't similar products existed for a while now? I wonder how Soylent compares to a product like Ensure, or other meal-replacement powders / shakes that have been on the market for years already. Is Soylent significantly cheaper, and/or is it better nutritionally?
I think for Soylent to really explode in sales, they should find a way to market it as a cheap weight loss solution or something similar. The mass market loves weight loss products.
I've read on the Soylent message board and various related sub-reddits that Ensure and similar products are indeed not as nutritionally optimal. Specifically, many of them are loaded with sugar so that they taste good. Which may be okay for 1 meal, but bad if you are using it regularly. Also, they probably are more expensive.
That said, Ensure is usually the product I hear has too much sugar. I'd be curious if anyone with more knowledge has looked into this issue more, or compared the nutritional components of the major players in that market.
Here is a quote [1] referring to how Mitch McConnell (Republican Senate Minority Leader, soon to be Majority Leader) handles nut-jobs like Ted Cruz:
"Mitch has very carefully, very methodically, very much under the radar, isolated Ted Cruz. He's kind of sealed him off like the body puts a sack around some foreign matter"
I believe that's how most Republicans feel about him. Cruz echoes the idiotic thoughts of a very very small minority. But, since they sound like such bizarre nut-jobs, they get media coverage.
[1] http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2014/1...