Slashdot Mirror

Except, that's what we did in the 1920s: Lete everybody say everything they want. And that allowed extremists like Hitler to amass a strong following and take over the government and transform the Weimar Republic into the Third Reich.

I guess you missed the memo about the Nazis using the court system of the Weimar Republic as a huge propaganda vehicle. The Weimar Republic had hate speech laws. The Wiemar Republic prosecuted various high ranking Nazis for hate speech against Jews and other minorities. And the Nazis won big as a result.

Researching my book "The Tyranny of Silence: How One Cartoon Ignited a Global Debate on the Future of Free Speech," I looked into the status of free speech in Weimar Germany. To my surprise, I found that Weimar Germany had hate speech laws, and that they were applied against anti-Semites like Julius Streicher, the publisher of the Nazi newspaper Der Sturmer; Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's minister of propaganda; and Theodor Fritsch,a journalist and publisher of anti-Semitic propaganda. Streicher was sent to jail twice, and Goebbels lost every case that Bernhard Weiss, the deputy police chief of Berlin (and frequent target of anti-Semitic vilification), brought against him for defamation.

Further, this aid was quite material. It was these repeated, petty, ineffectual persecutions that brought the Nazis to the public eye and transformed them from some Bavarian gang to a national movement in Germany.

So the Weimar Republic isn't a case where evil happened because there was no hate speech law. Instead, it's a case where evil was greatly abetted by hate speech law.

Don't trust an Aussie website to get the facts of US law correct. The Atlantic, no fan of Trump, even admits that the President is exempt from conflict of interest laws. The Boston Globe, which endorsed Clinton for President, also confirms the exemption.

Sorry, kwbauer, the fact is, we've already heard that sentiment. Republicans have proclaimed they have a mandate. Oh you may sputter over use of another phrasing, and you certainly won't admit the meaning is clear, but we've heard it.

Don't worry, some of us remember. Hypocrisy, and amnesia may be your defect, but others, others have their own recollections, and can spot your lies.

You have done it. You will do it again. Your political side has done it, in this particular instance. They have made the claim, get to the back of the bus. And yet...Trump still has less voters than Obama did. And a tighter margin.

Feel free to shock me, admit my interpretation is correct, then deny that Paul Ryan was correct.

Where to start? Perhaps you could start by reading the articles you've linked, or maybe even going to the actual sources of those stories? Allow me to help:

1) The Thornton Law firm (straw donor program) -- The Boston Globe reports that at least 21 politicians nationwide, including Senator Elizabeth Warren, have agreed to give back or give-away over $600,000 received from the law firm. Given that no charges have yet been brought, nor have federal authorities even begun investigating the case, it looks to me like the Democrats who received donations from the Thornton firm are being about as above-board regarding this unfortunate incident as you could reasonably ask them to be.

2) Patriot Majority USA (voter fraud ring) -- As other posters in this thread have noted, the investigation is for alleged voter registration issues, not voting fraud. However, a total of 10 suspicious registration forms, out of the 40,000 the group claims to have submitted, certainly isn't going to move the election one iota in either direction, and this incident seems a far cry from the kind of fraud you appear to be alleging.

3) Peter Kadzik email on May 19th, 2015 -- As CNN points out in a recent article, the filing referred to in the email had already been made public a day before Mr. Kadzik sent his email. However, aside from that point, I'd agree it does look like Mr. Kadzik intended to tip-off the Clinton campaign, and I would also agree that even the appearance of impropriety in a Justice Department official should be investigated.

4) Peter Kadzik supposedly in charge of reopened investigation -- Again, as CNN reported in the article linked above, Peter Kadzik is not involved in any known Justice Department investigations regarding the Clinton family. Obviously, if Mr. Kadzik isn't involved the investigations, there is no conflict of interest, making his relationship with John Podesta, or his son's relationship with Podesta for that matter, wholly immaterial. Even Republican Senator Trey Gowdy, who chaired the House Select Committee on Benghazi, admits Mr. Kadzik isn't a decision-maker at the Department of Justice.

5) Hopewell Baptist Church fire -- Unfortunately, your YOUCARING link appears dead, but several sources confirm that the Hopewell church was likely set on fire Tuesday night, with the message 'Vote Trump' spray-painted around the same time. As the article points out, there's likely no way to know for sure if Trump supporters started the fire, but it's certainly troubling. However, I have no doubt that the community of Greenville will pull together and rebuild the damage, and I imagine some of that help will likely come from Republicans, including those supporting Trump in the election.

Democracy, two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

It never works out in the end.

And it hasn't worked out in Scandinavia.

https://fee.org/articles/the-m...
https://www.bostonglobe.com/op...
http://www.thenewamerican.com/...

If all you listen to is Left-wing news and Bernie, you'd never know socialism doesn't work.

Oh, so you could basically just have boiled it down to "it's a ridiculous strawman that I and my fellow alt-rightists scumbags have invented, in order to further our hateful agendas".

That would have made it so much clearer.

So self-identified labels are a strawman? FYI "SJW" is a label created by social justice warriors, I know...facts hurt feels. But, nice assumptions there. Do you also believe that the "right" and "conservatives" are dangerous neo-nazi's that are bent on world domination and to dispose of (((them))), while kicking illegals and plotting ways to resurrect Hitler? I think I got all the regressive talking points there. No wait, I missed Pepe and how a cartoon frog is a neo-nazi hate symbol for white supremacy.

After all, I'm sure these regressive leftists who fit all of those points are just harmless. Just like those ones who were protesting at Mizzou, and Yale, Harvard, Oxford, Toronto, etc, etc, etc. Get triggered at human bones claim that halloween costumes are racist, and offer "counseling" for it. Scream that kimono's are cultural appropriation and so on, and on, and on. Very invented....

Yup. The practice of small controlled burns and/or fuel management just aren't practiced. I was shocked earlier this year with this story where they mentioned that it hadn't burned in 70 years. It probably hadn't been logged or cleaned out at all in that time either. From a few years back here in MN there was the gigantic fires up in the BWCA and there was a big concern about the blow down from several years previous since there were just piles of dry wood laying around from that still. After the blow down a bunch of timber companies wanted to go in and take a bunch of the timber as it had economic value at the time but weren't allowed to so instead it was just left there to pile up. I know that the BWCA has been a stop all fires a quickly as possible before the massive fires a few years back so there likely was a lot of built up dry fuel.

I have a lake property up in northern Minnesota and since acquiring it have started the massive effort of cleaning out the dead wood and brush on the property to prevent a bad fire. Last year I cut split and stacked about 6 cords of wood and sold 4 of them to the neighbor for $300 to heat his house. The rest was stacked in a neat tightly packed pile in the middle of the clearing where the fire ring, picnic tables, chairs, and where the tents go. This year I have already done 4 cords and will probably get another 3 cords. I will likely sell another 4 cords to the neighbor this year as well as I won't go through that much wood. Next year the neighbor wants me to go and start clearing his property of dead tree as he is afraid of using a chain saw so he is willing to pay me a couple hundred dollars to take down and cut up dead trees so they are in manageable chunks he can split.

The medical experts that sided with the family included the girls primary physician at Tufts Medical Center who knew her well and was treating her successfully, as well as many other MD experts in the same field who were unpaid and who reviewed and agreed with his diagnosis.

They were MDs, not homeopaths.

The state sided initially with the hospital and thus they are as criminally liable for her injury, deprivation of her meds for mitochondrial disease, 16 months of physical and psychological torture, as well as treating the parents like they had abused their daughter. She went in with the flu, but was otherwise functional, with videos just prior of her skating and hanging out with friends.

The quacks at the hospital locked her in a psych ward for 16 months. After 16 months without meds the hospital had nearly killed her, which is why they finally returned custody to the parents, because if she had died someone would have been facing manslaughter at least if not 2nd degree murder. When she was finally released she could not stand, sit or walk on her own and had other severe symptoms of the untreated mitochondrial disease. She has also had to have multiple surgeries to correct some of the damage.

Since your google is broken, here are some links. I know it sounds like Stalinist Russia, but this actually happened in the US a couple of years ago...

https://www.bostonglobe.com/me...

http://www.theblaze.com/storie...

If you have kids and didn't know about this story, you need to wake up and pay attention to the people and politicians who are trying to take away your rights as a citizen and as a parent. It is some scary shit.

Long article.

Nobody's saying what specific mitochondrial disease is suspected. Another article said that there was no diagnosis.

Additionally, after a year she didn't improve. I would think something that was all in her head wouldn't be causing her hair to fall out. I also read about the involvement of a Christian organization on the parents' side, which gave me pause.

All things considered, this seems like a case of a group of doctors at the hospital who have been on an irrational mission to prove themselves right. Not the first time or last time a doctor's gotten completely irrational to the detrimenet of the patient. A pediatrician says "mitochondrial disease" and refers to a gastroenterologist. Somehow instead of a gastroenterologist, the hospital has her seen by a psychiatrist who says "it's in her head." Who can you trust? The actual MD or the shrink?

... but the FDA is still finding something to complain about.

This is after preeminent scientists argue that bioethics needs to get out of the way of modern research.

An interesting parallel, by the way, was John Nestor. Here was a guy that intentionally (and even with good intention) drove 55MPH in the fast lane of DC traffic. He was, at best, misguided, since speed differential is more dangeous than speed and his actions were likely safety-reducing. He was also an FDA bureaucrat that never approved a drug and was ultimately fired for his "caution" that probably cost more lives and more lifesaving drugs than it ever saved.

30 miles from Rhode Island, 4 miles from Block Island.

An AC above linked this picture.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/me...

Screeech! Bawlllll!! Moan!!! Just fucking deal with it, okay.

I am all for sustainable wind-generated energy, but let's not take a dump in the waters directly off shore.
You say you are all for it but here you are bawling about it likening it to "a dump." Your brain is so rigid you see a wind generator and think it's an abomination on the face on the Earth yet you can't explain why. Because you're not thinking. Try thinking. Your sense of visual aesthetics. Other peoples lives. I bet you don't bother protesting outside of ugly "dump" coal powerstations do you? You're a NIMBY. http://www.scientificamerican....

Here's less 'stunning' picture of this... https://www.bostonglobe.com/me...

oh the horror! you must cry yourself to sleep at night. http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/...

Property isn't insanely expensive by historical standards unless you live in a place like NYC or San Francisco. You can get a nice modest house near where I live for $90-150K US which is entirely reasonable.

It's not just NYC and San Francisco, it's every major urban area on the east coast, west coast, and Texas. The midwest may be the only part of the country where affordable housing near urban areas is still readily available, so using it as your example doesn't really make any sense. See the March 2016 Trulia report for the current nationwide housing trends. It's even worse in the Boston area, where homes priced under $500,000 are disappearing. So unless you consider the bulk of the country outside of the midwest to be "like NYC or San Francisco," your statement simply isn't true.

And why exactly do we need to "limit the number of cars on the road"? Is that in the consumers best interest?

The short answer is no, it isn't in the consumers' best interests, and it may never have been either--the medallion system is in fact often literally the textbook example given for rent-seeking. NPR briefly covers the topic with a mention on the negative consequences to consumers, while the Boston Globe covers why the medallion system ought to be scrapped by answering your question in detail while covering some of the abuses of drivers the medallion system creates as well.

Total Failure of Government and Society and not a good sign for the future of the human race. I personally have been well aware of the risks of Antibiotic-Resistant for over 20 years. This was the text book example of natural selection in my High School Biology class.

Instead of listening to the scientists and public health officals on the risks, we have let the greed and money in big ag run make our laws. We let them dump antibiotics in our livestock food in so we could have cheap meat and now the chickens are coming home to roost.

Welcome back to the pre-antibiotic era where a cut can be deadly and hospitals can kill you. Nice job humanity!

While what you say may be true, I disagree with your conclusions and your hindsight.

There should be no problem giving massive amounts of antibiotics to livestock. In fact, we should be giving *more*, or at least *more effective* antibiotics to livestock.

The regulatory problem wasn't from giving out too many antibiotics, it was because the regulations are so stiff that it's impossible to create new antibiotics. The fundamental flaw in the system was to make government bureaucrats responsible for risk, while making drug companies responsible for that risk.

This has led to risk-averse government bureaucrats setting the bar so high that it's become impossible to make new drugs.

The Hippocratic oath reads (in part): "above all, do no harm". This was rewritten by the FAA to be: "do no harm at any cost!"

It currently costs upwards of a billion dollars to bring a new prescription drug to market. No company can afford to make a new drug unless it can apply to everyone as a maintenance dose.

Viagra was only developed because it was a noticed side-effect of a high blood pressure medicine.

Suppose we had 25 approved antibiotics, and used them in 5-year increments in a rotating scale. Each year 5 of the 25 antibiotics could be used, and each year one would be rotated out and another added. Each antibiotic would be used for 5 years and then disappear for 20. It would take a very long time under that scheme for diseases to develop immunity.

We can't do that any more, because it's impossible to develop new antibiotics.

There's lots of common-sense ways we could change this, but we don't.

We're killing ourselves from an abundance of caution.

Take a look at the patent and monipoly abuse settlement with Skyhook Wireless, and wonder which patents they had to stop violating.

            https://www.bostonglobe.com/bu...

Because whites feel unsafe when driven by non-whites.

For those too lazy to read, it's probably not going to hold in court and these geniuses may be in a world of hurt soon.

The leaders of Boston have passed a travel ban against North Carolina over the attempt to keep women and children safe by keeping people with male parts out of the ladies' rooms...

Sex-based discrimination in the name of perceived safety is clearly completely impermissible in liberal Boston. How can they allow this in their own city while banning travel to other places that do similar things? Why are they not banning travel to cities (and other entire nations) where cabs (and restrooms and showers and locker rooms) are segregated by sex? (oh, yeah.... then they'd have to ban travel to all the super-wealthy Muslim nations that invest massive fortunes made on petroleum in big Boston-based businesses.

Nothing like leftist hypocrisy.

OK, isn't it interesting though that the same type of service aimed only at white customers or only for a specific religion would cause a massive outcry and also would be illegal?

You mean outcry like say all the experts saying it's illegal.

I work a few blocks from the proposed HQ site and there are construction cranes in all directions, & there is plenty of demand for office space in Fort Point and excellent freeway access due to Big Dig exit at convention center. We already have enough Internet of Things meetups believe it or not.

Muckrock and the Boston Institute of Nonprofit Journalism tried to raise $1700 demanded by the mayor's office for reproducing the GE emails. But who needs emails when the charm offensive has begun? BINJ did a five-part series on the scheme.

These crony style one-off deals are always terrible economics. The "free market" certainly will fill that space very soon. There is no lack of demand, instead tons of local money already develops this area. In Jan 2015 a parking ramp in Fort Point sold for $56 million or $106,500 per spot!

As noted above many in the population are furious #MakeGEpay protesting in the freeze of last weekend's clipper. (Mayor Walsh was elected with 52% on 38% turnout). The schools are facing a $50 million shortfall, students walked out just a few days ago partially protesting this.

In this deal they don't have to pay regular taxes, instead they get to muck around in the local school system with all the purse strings attached as the press release makes clear. Instead of letting the city get normal tax revenue and the School Board allocate money for programs GE gets to basically do what it likes, as the press release clearly specifies.

Sen. Sanders said they are "destroying the moral fabric" of the USA. Boston Magazine reported in January:

"GE isn't exactly a shining model of corporate conduct. The company is one of most notorious abusers of offshore tax havens, with $119 billion stashed away across 18 overseas locations as of 2015. Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders once named GE the nation's top corporate tax avoider. From 2002 to 2011, GE eliminated a fifth of its U.S. workforce while its offshore profits multiplied sixfold to $92 billion."

Do you really think that some of these Beacon Hill luminaries haven't been looking forward to a taste of that offshore $119,000,000,000?? The centralization of decisionmaking in the schools, by withholding program revenue, is unfolding in parallel to this incredible offshore tax scam. Maybe they want Ft Point Channel access to float in barges of cash, why not? I am disappointed none of this important info is in the story summary.

I work a few blocks from the proposed HQ site and there are construction cranes in all directions, & there is plenty of demand for office space in Fort Point and excellent freeway access due to Big Dig exit at convention center. We already have enough Internet of Things meetups believe it or not.

Muckrock and the Boston Institute of Nonprofit Journalism tried to raise $1700 demanded by the mayor's office for reproducing the GE emails. But who needs emails when the charm offensive has begun? BINJ did a five-part series on the scheme.

These crony style one-off deals are always terrible economics. The "free market" certainly will fill that space very soon. There is no lack of demand, instead tons of local money already develops this area. In Jan 2015 a parking ramp in Fort Point sold for $56 million or $106,500 per spot!

As noted above many in the population are furious #MakeGEpay protesting in the freeze of last weekend's clipper. (Mayor Walsh was elected with 52% on 38% turnout). The schools are facing a $50 million shortfall, students walked out just a few days ago partially protesting this.

In this deal they don't have to pay regular taxes, instead they get to muck around in the local school system with all the purse strings attached as the press release makes clear. Instead of letting the city get normal tax revenue and the School Board allocate money for programs GE gets to basically do what it likes, as the press release clearly specifies.

Sen. Sanders said they are "destroying the moral fabric" of the USA. Boston Magazine reported in January:

"GE isn't exactly a shining model of corporate conduct. The company is one of most notorious abusers of offshore tax havens, with $119 billion stashed away across 18 overseas locations as of 2015. Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Bernie Sanders once named GE the nation's top corporate tax avoider. From 2002 to 2011, GE eliminated a fifth of its U.S. workforce while its offshore profits multiplied sixfold to $92 billion."

Do you really think that some of these Beacon Hill luminaries haven't been looking forward to a taste of that offshore $119,000,000,000?? The centralization of decisionmaking in the schools, by withholding program revenue, is unfolding in parallel to this incredible offshore tax scam. Maybe they want Ft Point Channel access to float in barges of cash, why not? I am disappointed none of this important info is in the story summary.

According to a couple of reports he was arrested in Miami.

Boston Children's Hospital was likely in the wrong for what they did. Here's some background: https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/12/07/difficult-return-hospital-for-justina-pelletier/u4JXzmt5YsmWhYk95za2aK/story.html. Justina Pelletier had been diagnosed with a mitochondrial disorder, but doctors at BCH decided the ailments were mental. They claimed that Pelletier's parents were harming her by seeking medical treatments that the BCH doctors deemed unnecessary with their diagnosis. Pelletier was declared a ward of the state and spent over a year in a psychiatric health unit. Another article worth reading is http://www.csoonline.com/article/2147347/hacktivism/activisms-slippery-slope-anonymous-targets-childrens-hospital.html, which says that there was a note allegedly written by Pelletier saying that caregivers in the psychiatric health unit were abusing her.

Diagnosing some ailments is difficult, and doctors don't always agree. I suspect Pelletier's parents believed they were doing the right thing. Declaring her a ward of the state was a pretty awful thing to do. If the caregivers didn't treat her well, that's even worse. Campaigns on social media and going to the traditional media to protest this is absolutely warranted. Threatening to harm doctors crosses the line. Denial of service attacks against a hospital might affect systems used to provide medical care, endangering patients. That's truly wrong because it puts innocent people at risk of being collateral damage.

Oh, they were public works projects ... paid for with bonds that the airlines agreed to pay, and are currently paying.

Do airports pay property taxes? No. Do ticket prices cover the full cost of air traffic control? No. Do ticket prices cover the full cost of TSA screening? Also no.

the airlines don't get to pull the eminent domain card.

Unfortunately, that is also false.

The level of arrogance and ignorance in both your post and the grandparent would be astounding if it wasn't for the fact that it appears to be all-too-common. That "landlocked Asian minor country" has the largest coastline of any nation in the world. They are in the midst of rapid deployment of technologies to exploit the resources and opportunities of the arctic region including many new icebreakers in an effort to open a northern sea route (which may become very viable if the global warming predictions come true). Further, their current military campaign in Syria has proven remarkably effective, especially in contrast to the anemic actions of the United States and our western allies before they entered the conflict. They have demonstrated the capabilities of submarines being able to fire missiles while submerged to the effective use of some of their most modern fighters (as opposed to our failed F-35) and effective long range cruise missiles. They are growing increasingly capable while we appear to be stagnating.

It should also be noted that Russia has been signing major deals with some of the world's largest nations at the same time that we seem to be alienating our friends here in the United States. Far from being a needy border-line-third-world-nation, Russia seems to be showing us up time and again. Twice now the United States in the past few years, the United States has been forced to back down when Russia asserted their will in Syria, and despite economic pressure on Russia over Ukraine, they have not backed down at all. A lot of talk has been made over how Russia has a shrinking cash reserve and yet everyone seems to forget that _they_actually_have_a_reserve. Further, their foreign debt is currently decreasing at the same time our national debt has just reached $19 trillion. When one considers that our proposed defense budget is as large at the combined total of the next 8 countries and yet we have a fighter that cannot fight and a high-tech destroyer that cannot float, I don't think we have much room at all to speak of Russian corruption (though it almost certainly exists).

Given current trajectories, it seems to me that our country is more likely to face a future of irrelevancy than the Russians right now. Our press is very selective about what they cover, but reality has a nasty way of asserting itself and often in very painful ways.

Anyone who has a PhD, especially from MIT, should have a Federal Minimum Income of $250,000/year.

That's definitely not true. Most PhD's in the sciences get positions as "postdoctoral students", which only pay $40,000 to $50,000 per year. See

http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/10/04/glut-postdoc-researchers-stirs-quiet-crisis-science/HWxyErx9RNIW17khv0MWTN/story.html

The article linked is actually an editorial in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11...

Links to the actual case, from the Associated Press, on the Boston Globe site:
"American can't sue FBI over abuse claims, federal appeals court says", https://www.bostonglobe.com/ne...

Link to the decision:
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/...

Oddly, why didn't you suggest a story on how Taxi drives are on strike right now at this very moment over Uber, which you mysteriously, inexplicably failed to mention! http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/84e1... https://www.bostonglobe.com/bu... http://algarvedailynews.com/ne... http://www.chicagobusiness.com... http://www.cbsnews.com/picture... http://www.abc.net.au/news/201... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/new... http://www.theguardian.com/tec... https://euobserver.com/connect... http://www.wftv.com/videos/new... http://in-cyprus.com/nicosia-t...

We have a glut of lawyers, which has nothing to do with computers. Good attorneys will always demand higher prices because they are better. Too many law schools are putting out too many graduates who can't find jobs in the legal profession.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/05/09/the-lawyer-bubble-pops-not-moment-too-soon/qAYzQ823qpfi4GQl2OiPZM/story.html

The authorities in at least 2 US states (Indiana, Massachusetts) beg to differ.

They concluded that Planned Parenthood is not engaged in *any* such transfer of bodies or even bits of them, not even through donations.

Let's see your videos that you're so confident in that you couldn't be bothered to link to them, shall we?

Be sure to let us know who's prepared to go on the record as to their authenticity and provenance, too.

We want to know!

...and pull a Clinton when they ask for data...

You misspelled Romney . HTH. HAND.

The Boston Globe ran an article about this last year: https://www.bostonglobe.com/id...

off Nantucket as told here

Thanks for posting those stats. An interesting dip in the 60s (and more no-opinions). Was this the result of the general cultural liberation, before increased crime hardened people's attitudes, then before decreased crime and a spate of wrong convictions started bringing it down again?

Massachusetts is more liberal than the US average, meaning that only one-in three support death sentences (one-in-four in Boston). Even fewer support it in this case.

Even his parents have disowned him.

Far from it.

Therefore the only task of those who write software to grade essays is that the variation of the machine is no worse that the variations of the humans. There is some success in this. Edx has a module that will grade essays. As far as I know the value in this is quicker and more uniform feedback for practice essays.

Well, I'm a humanities guy and I know enough about the scientific method to understand that you don't know whether you have "success" until you test your bright idea in the real world and find out whether it actually works. And that's what MIT professor Les Perelman said in the article you're citing:

“My first and greatest objection to the research is that they did not have any valid statistical test comparing the software directly to human graders,” said Perelman, a retired director of writing and a current researcher at MIT.

As Perelman said, some computer students wrote a program that can turn out gibberish that the main robo-grading program consistently scores above the 90th percentile.

Of course humanities majors, who have generally have minimal understanding of advanced technology, hate it. This, of course, includes journalists.

The article you're citing was not written by a journalist, but by a retired MIT writing professor.

So you've gotten it wrong on both the science and the reading comprehension. No mod points for you.

This is not to say that computer graded essays are going to be as good of an assessment as human graded essays. However, it may be good enough, and better than other objective measures, such as fill in the bubble tests. In fact anything that minimizes the cost of open ended free response assessment is going to benefit anyone. Securing multiple guess test is very expensive, and the value of them are highly questionable. They tend to overestimate the value of student how have vague passive knowledge, and underestimate the value of those who have an ability to actively apply knowledge.

I am deducting another point for bad grammar.

Computer graded essays can check whether an essay complies with an algorithm, and they can take care of anything you can reduce to an algorithm. The great success of computer writing was the spell-checker. There is also a grammar-checker which I never use because it doesn't work well enough for me. There are also algorithms to check the format of literature citations, which are useful.

But (as somebody who writes for a living) the most important features of writing depend on an understanding of the content. Most important: Is it correct? As Perelman says, the robo-graders ignore whether what you say is true (or whether it even makes sense). The next thing I look at: If the author takes a controversial position, does he give both sides of the argument? This is what you may know as Neutral Point of View from Wikipedia (although writers have known about it since the ancient Greeks.) Wikipedia actually has a pretty good structure.

Let's remember the purpose of writing: A person communicating an idea to somebody else. When I read something, I'm looking for a good idea, clearly communicated. If the algorithm can't identify a good idea (and as Perelman showed, it can't), then it can't tell me whether the writing is any good. Algorithms have surprised me, but I can't imagine how an algorithm can tell me whether an idea is good.

Maybe somebody can write a program to cheat. Try random sentences and feed them into a copy of the AI until you get a good grade.

They did that.

http://www.bostonglobe.com/opi...
Flunk the robo-graders
By Les Perelman
April 30, 2014

(Computer science students at MIT and Harvard developed an application that generates gibberish that IntelliMetric, a robot essay-grading system, consistently scores above the 90th percentile. IntelliMetric scored incoherent essays as "advanced" in focus, meaning, language use and style. None of the major testing companies allows demonstrations of their robo-graders. Longer essays get higher grades, even if they make no sense.)

Typical output: “According to professor of theory of knowledge Leon Trotsky, privacy is the most fundamental report of humankind. Radiation on advocates to an orator transmits gamma rays of parsimony to implode.’’

Therefore the only task of those who write software to grade essays is that the variation of the machine is no worse that the variations of the humans. There is some success in this. Edx has a module that will grade essays. As far as I know the value in this is quicker and more uniform feedback for practice essays. Of course humanities majors, who have generally have minimal understanding of advanced technology, hate it. This, of course, includes journalists.

This is not to say that computer graded essays are going to be as good of an assessment as human graded essays. However, it may be good enough, and better than other objective measures, such as fill in the bubble tests. In fact anything that minimizes the cost of open ended free response assessment is going to benefit anyone. Securing multiple guess test is very expensive, and the value of them are highly questionable. They tend to overestimate the value of student how have vague passive knowledge, and underestimate the value of those who have an ability to actively apply knowledge.

AI is not ready to do this task properly, but, at least in the US, human grading has sometimes been dumbed-down to the point where you would not even need current 'AI' to do as well, as prof. Perelman of MIT has demonstrated - e.g: http://www.bostonglobe.com/opi...

But it easily has the worst taxis in the nation.

Desalination is a plausible solution for water for consumer use--that is, urban and suburban locations.

It is not a very plausible solution for agricultural use-- too expensive. Do you realize that those people take the water and just dump it on the ground?

*(well, some of the suburban people just spray it on the ground, too. But they spray millions and millions of gallons on lawns. Sounds like a lot... but agriculture uses trillions of gallons.)

Water rights are complicated. Since the rule is, whoever grabbed it first owns the rights to the water, the people who own it aren't necessarily the ones who use it most responsibly. http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Agriculture is 80% of California's water use (although only 1.5% of California's economy) The big problem is almonds. Who would have thought that such a niche foodstuff would drive agricultural water? https://www.bostonglobe.com/bu...

Trillions? Yep: http://science.nasa.gov/scienc...

Massachusetts. (where Amazon doesn't have a warehouse..)

But soon, they will:

http://www.bostonglobe.com/bus...

Seven Year Old San Francisco Girl Struck and Killed By Uber Driver; Uber Denies Responsibility http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/...

Boston Uber Driver Charged with indecent Assault and Battery http://www.bostonglobe.com/met...

Off-Duty LA Uber Driver Accused of Sexual Assault http://www.bizjournals.com/los...

Chicago Uber Driver With Felony Conviction Charged With Battery For Allegedly Hitting Passenger http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Writer and Activist Reports Being Choked in DC; Uber Denies The Event and Responsibility http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Assaults Customer for Burping http://www.washingtoncitypaper...

San Francisco Uber Customer Claims Abuse and Assault by Uber Driver (Pando) http://pando.com/2013/11/25/ub...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver Pulls Gun on Valet in Atlanta http://pando.com/2014/09/08/at...

Uber Driver Punches Passenger in Oklahoma http://newsok.com/oklahoma-cit...

Lyft Driver Attacks Pedestrian in San Francisco http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news...

Lyft Driver Brandishes Knife in Los Angeles http://www.laweekly.com/2013-0...

Uber Customer Sues for $2M over Alleged Driver Stabbing in DC http://dcinno.streetwise.co/20...

DC Uber Driver Allegedly Rapes Customer http://betabeat.com/2013/03/ub...

Uber Driver Charged with Fondling Passenger in Chicago http://valleywag.gawker.com/ub...

DC Uber Driver Arrested for Alleged Rape But Not Charged Despite Strong Evidence http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

Another DC Uber Driver Accused of Molesting Uber Rider http://valleywag.gawker.com/an...

Passenger Struck In Head With Hammer by UberX Driver http://www.forbes.com/sites/el...

Uber Driver in India Accused of Rape http://www.bbc.c

As the UVA Rape Hoax showed, they don't want the police to handle campus cases because that pesky "due process of law" prevents them from punishing males before they've been convicted.

They prefer Star Chambers where the lives of men can be ruined without offering them a chance to fight back. Much better for instituting conformkity and social control to the identitarian agenda.

No worries. We will get there soon enough by slices:

"The Massachusetts court said the Second Amendment protections did not apply to stun guns because, among other reasons, they were “thoroughly modern” inventions that were not in common use at the time the Second Amendment was enacted in 1789."

http://www.bostonglobe.com/met...

"... they hired someone who they thought would bring a lot of Google inside information to them, ..."

Marissa Meyer was demoted, according to an L.A. Times story that has now been deleted, but is available at another site.

Quote: "But when Page took over as CEO in April 2011, he did not make a spot for her on his senior leadership team. Instead, she took over the company's location and local products, fueling speculation she would leave Google."

Do you think someone can be CEO and take care of a baby at the same time?

Back in 2006, before she joined Yahoo, there were questions about how much she thinking she could do, considering her work habits: How I work.

Quote: "I do marathon e-mail catch-up sessions, sometimes on a Saturday or Sunday. I'll just sit down and do e-mail for ten to 14 hours straight. I almost always have the radio or my TV on."

Another, earlier quote: "I use Gmail for my personal e-mail -- 15 to 20 e-mails a day -- but on my work e-mail I get as many as 700 to 800 a day, so I need something really fast."

I've been following with interest the debate about government-regulated taxis versus free-market Uber.

So far as I can tell, the argument for Uber is that it's cheaper, and the rides are nicer and more convenient, but otherwise it's the same service. In particular, the service has not been a statistically significant source of crime.

The arguments against are that 1) it's illegal, and 2) Uber drivers don't have enough (or the right kind of) insurance.

The first argument seems contrived. Up here in NH the Portsmouth taxi commission decided that Uber is a better solution, then voted to disband. (As the Free State project points out, "where else would this happen?")

And as to the insurance argument, the Boston Globe reports that "Passengers hurt in accidents often run into denial and evasion by poorly insured firms".

Uber is a good service, people seem to like and want it.

Are there any objections I've missed? Besides "predictions", of course(*). Anyone can predict anything and sound just like an economist.

(*) Predictions are invalid because both solutions are in play right now. There's no need to predict what will happen because we can just look to see if it's happening.

For evangelicals, the discovery of advanced extraterrestrial life has the potential to be devastating. Humans, in the view of most evangelicals, are the singular focus of God's creative attention and Christianity is the universal religion. Therefore, other advanced intelligences cannot exist.

A lot of economists view and post on this board, so maybe one of them could explain something to me.

The libertarian view would seem to apply here: a capitalistic system taken out of the free-market model and run by well-meaning regulation to prevent certain bad practices. Taxi rides must be regulated by government, lest the rides become unsavory, price gouging, and unsafe. Taxi rides are considered a necessary infrastructure, and thus a natural monopoly.

(And to be clear, having safe, reliable transportation in a city brings a lot of benefits: tourism, visiting businessmen, and so on.)

Despite the well-meaning reasons for all this, the taxi medallion system does not live up to it's purported goals. Taxi rides are the subject of satire, sarcasm, and mockery.

Here's a typical first-hand report.

Taxi medallions sell for multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars. The money is used to fund the regulatory system surrounding taxis, and one would *suppose* that with this much money available that there would be a lot of infrastructure keeping things clean, safe, and reliable.

And yet, taxis are neither clean, safe, nor reliable. Here's a series of articles from Boston on the situation. From those articles:

[...] Passengers hurt in accidents often run into denial and evasion by poorly insured firms

[...] fleet owners get rich, drivers are frequently fleeced, and the city does little about it

It's abundantly clear that the government-regulated, natural monopoly solution simply *doesn't work*.

So here's my question: It would seem on first reading that the Libertarian view, of "remove regulation and let the free market decide" is the better solution. We have two models both active in the same market (taxi medallions with regulation, versus app-driven Uber) and it would appear that the Libertarian model is better.

Why is the Libertarian view on this particular narrow situation not the correct view?

Libertarian, you keep using that word, I don't think it means what you think it means.

It has been, as a matter of recent history the Republican position to call for smaller government, and de-regulation of businesses . The public still remembers how well that didn't work with Enron.

Sorry to burn your straw man argument to the ground Mr. Boehner..but that is what actually happens when you play with fire.

and I am not actually sorry.. deal with it!

A lot of economists view and post on this board, so maybe one of them could explain something to me.

The libertarian view would seem to apply here: a capitalistic system taken out of the free-market model and run by well-meaning regulation to prevent certain bad practices. Taxi rides must be regulated by government, lest the rides become unsavory, price gouging, and unsafe. Taxi rides are considered a necessary infrastructure, and thus a natural monopoly.

(And to be clear, having safe, reliable transportation in a city brings a lot of benefits: tourism, visiting businessmen, and so on.)

Despite the well-meaning reasons for all this, the taxi medallion system does not live up to it's purported goals. Taxi rides are the subject of satire, sarcasm, and mockery.

Here's a typical first-hand report.

Taxi medallions sell for multiple hundreds of thousands of dollars. The money is used to fund the regulatory system surrounding taxis, and one would *suppose* that with this much money available that there would be a lot of infrastructure keeping things clean, safe, and reliable.

And yet, taxis are neither clean, safe, nor reliable. Here's a series of articles from Boston on the situation. From those articles:

[...] Passengers hurt in accidents often run into denial and evasion by poorly insured firms

[...] fleet owners get rich, drivers are frequently fleeced, and the city does little about it

It's abundantly clear that the government-regulated, natural monopoly solution simply *doesn't work*.

So here's my question: It would seem on first reading that the Libertarian view, of "remove regulation and let the free market decide" is the better solution. We have two models both active in the same market (taxi medallions with regulation, versus app-driven Uber) and it would appear that the Libertarian model is better.

Why is the Libertarian view on this particular narrow situation not the correct view?