First, I'll say being a "dedicated political centrist" was a semi-intentional usage of a vague term. Sometimes I get a bit lazy on/. and take shortcuts in my speech; I hate writing out a half-page of well thought out material and have no mods or no responses - then I wonder if anyone even read the damn thing! Interestingly my more pithy statements tend to get the most attention, and I'm sure that's not a coincidence
Do you just see which way the wind blows, and pick your beliefs from the most popular ones regardless of their merit? If so, are you a politician yourself?
No, I evaluate each issue on its merit rather than choosing a party and associating myself with a position merely because my party chooses to support it. However, I'm always willing to listen to the other side and have, on very rare occasions (maybe once or twice) changed my viewpoint after hearing consistently good arguments which I had no good answer against.
Is there some belief you have that a large enough group of people with opposing views who have some overlap in the middle must be pointing to the truth with that overlap?
No, but I'd have to say, generally speaking, I'm not a zealot on many issues and I can usually appreciate where the other side is coming from and am willing to listen to their points.
Is the US really aligned so specifically along a line that your separately developed personal views actually fall on that line by chance?
I generally am very proud of the policies and practices of my country, though there have been very notable exceptions in recent years... There is no "US orientation" in terms of internal US politics, but there are certain things every major politician in the USA supports, and I too support (i.e. capitalism as an economic system, freedom, and constructive engagement with the rest of the world)
Are those who argue for each side of the political divide equally right and equally persuasive?
On certain separate and individual issues, yes.
Are you just too intellectually lazy to pick a side yet still willing to work to be dedicated to that position?
heh, now that would an interesting position. The answer is a qualified no. Qualified because I'm not affiliated with a party, because I dislike the extremes of both parties... perhaps I'm lazy because I don't want to come to terms with one of those extremes. And also there are some issues I just don't know enough about, and one or two that I'm frankly stumped on and can't make up my mind.
Do you support centrist policies specifically because both sides screw things up so badly that you'd like to make sure the more radical portions of either side never get enough votes to do anything major?
Yes, exactly. That's where a wisdom of crowds and gridlock shines. My ideal political configuration is a democratic president and a republican congress.
Is there some specific advantage to you, personally, in maintaining the current political climate instead of seeing it move one way or the other?
Outside of the way specific policy changes would affect most other people in the nation, no.
Your logic is so flawed and your opinion so uninformed, I'm beginning to wonder if you believe what you're saying or are just trying to get attention.
Your analogy to rentals is incorrect, for a number of reasons. I'm a landlord and have been for years, so I know a couple things about ownership and real estate. Real estate (real property) is governed by **completely separate** laws than personal property (chattel). It is governed by specific laws SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE you live and work in real property and your life can sometimes depend on it.
IIRC there are six rights associated with ownership of real property; as a condition of leasing a property a certain number of these ownership rights are actually transferred to the tenant and are specifically _taken away_ from the landlord - provided the tenant holds up their end of the contract (e.g. paying rent, not destroying the place). This is why a landlord cannot simply walk into a good tenant's property and tell them how to run their lives.
Personal property has no such set of rights and therefore is not subject (nor should it be) to the same laws as real property. If I rent you a motorcycle, I CAN tell you not to take it to a political rally because I disagree with the message, I CAN tell you not to take the bike certain places. Motorcycle riders attending rallies are not a protected class. Our constitutional rights are not absolute, by any means and have always been subject to restrictions - particularly with respect to the intersection of constitutional rights and private property. These are the legal facts.
You are certainly 100% wrong legally, and IMHO wrong entirely.
Your timing is impeccable, but your logic is flawed. So you think YOU should be able to tell them how to run their business? Or do you think the government should take care of that for you?
This is their property, they have a right to determine what is appropriate for them and what is not. If they suck and censor stuff that doesn't make sense, they go out of business.
You are parking your property on private property. You are subject to the reasonable (very broadly interpreted) rules of the private property owner. YOU are CHOOSING to put your content on THEIR site.
In my (admittedly anecdotal) experience, major websites are remarkably UP 100% of the time. I've never seen Google go down even once in the past few years.
For top level performers, yes. But for those of us who may want to learn to sing while not making asses of ourselves in front of human beings (and paying money in the process), this should work quite nicely.
/me thinking about how hard it would be to gather a list of registered voters and fire up Quick Test Pro to automatically generate thousands of letters...
Can't be too hard, right? I could probably have it done in less than a day. Geek power!:)
Are we effective enough and doing all we can do? If I were in charge (and it's probably a good thing I'm not!), I'd chart those "attacks" and look for patterns, I'd intercept other forms of intelligence and correlate them to the cyber-attacks. I'd track and trace these attacks, the origins, and I'd do a lot of very discrete and very skilled poking around of my own, I'd chart the origins and the weaknesses in the origin of attacks, I'd let the attacks continue, because 'who gives a shit', they're just showing their hand and not accomplishing a thing (if we've done our job correctly)... and most of all, I wouldn't tell ANYBODY. So that's the problem right there I guess.
I want SOMEONE that's technically knowledgable, trustworthy and independant to validate... yep, we're being smart. God knows Congress can't do it -- they just don't understand the "tubes", so it might be completely fuckered up due to lack of leadership... and that would be a very, very bad thing. We just don't know.
Yeah, wikipedia... I'm liking it less and less nowadays as I actually get in the habit of checking facts against it on other websites. Maybe it'll turn into something great someday...
But there were no mitigating factors on my misspelling of Tutsi's... unless laziness counts. However, I still stand by my comments that we do adhere to higher standards, for the most part. I knew more of the story 8 years or so ago, but the details are now very foggy. The summary is two tribes fought one of the most brutal and disgusting wars seen in the modern era and both sides treated each other like absolute shit.
Al-Qaeda is indeed a nebulous term, I agree, but it's a little more PC than saying "any one of a number of the assholes who are trying to kill us", which is what Al-Qaeda really means, at least to me.
The fact that you're saying that shows we do hold ourselves to a higher standard.
What kind of conditions do you think American prisoners were held in Iraq by Al-Queda? How about the Tootsies in Rwanda when they were held by their enemies?
You know, I truly appreciate the colonel's time in answering these questions, but WE STILL DON'T KNOW what the government and military is up to, or if they're even doing anything, right now, to defend our national interests. "The government works together with other countries and within itself, yada, yada, yada." I've heard it before.
We get cyber-attacked, everyone knows it and he admits it. But what are we DOING about it? I like the platitudes he espouses and I agree with them, but I still don't get the sense we're doing anything smart with these attacks. Obviously, we don't want to get embroiled in a full-scale cyber-war, which would lead to real war, but can't we track, trace and investigate them so we have the ability to immediately and devastatingly attack if, God forbid, we need to go to war with a major power? I've still never heard anything like this from the military folks... I can only hope the NSA is light years ahead of the military.
Eh, I suppose it's not for us (me) to know, but I'd be a little more assured if I knew they were actually doing something, and what that something was (even in a general sense).
To craft an analogy with conventional military operations, you don't need to tell me where you're putting the tanks, I just want proof you're making them.
Sure, a little coding is required if you want to do it right, but it's not so bad. It pays as well as, or depending on the market demand, better than a programmer.
Alternatively, you could go into technology management. You usually have one or two programmers that make more than you do, but it's a good living. Once you get into middle-management, you're making more than a programmer.
I'm sure a lot of hard R&D went into this, but something you've still got to get on a ladder multiple times for? C'mon.
Am I the only one who thinks home robotics is a VASTLY under-developed market? Yeah, I know how tough AI is, but I still get the nagging feeling we could be doing so much better if someone made a hard run for it. Seriously, look at Windows -- the damn robots don't have to be perfect, they just have to be ok.
Back in the late 70's & 80's the mantra was a computer in every home, today it should be a robot in every home... but I have yet to hear a single person step up and so much as declare it. Imagine the publicity in simply DECLARING such a thing...
Slashdot Mirror
I hope someone really does this -- kills two birds with one stone.
George Washington is spinning in his grave...
First, I'll say being a "dedicated political centrist" was a semi-intentional usage of a vague term. Sometimes I get a bit lazy on
Do you just see which way the wind blows, and pick your beliefs from the most popular ones regardless of their merit? If so, are you a politician yourself?
No, I evaluate each issue on its merit rather than choosing a party and associating myself with a position merely because my party chooses to support it. However, I'm always willing to listen to the other side and have, on very rare occasions (maybe once or twice) changed my viewpoint after hearing consistently good arguments which I had no good answer against.
Is there some belief you have that a large enough group of people with opposing views who have some overlap in the middle must be pointing to the truth with that overlap?
No, but I'd have to say, generally speaking, I'm not a zealot on many issues and I can usually appreciate where the other side is coming from and am willing to listen to their points.
Is the US really aligned so specifically along a line that your separately developed personal views actually fall on that line by chance?
I generally am very proud of the policies and practices of my country, though there have been very notable exceptions in recent years... There is no "US orientation" in terms of internal US politics, but there are certain things every major politician in the USA supports, and I too support (i.e. capitalism as an economic system, freedom, and constructive engagement with the rest of the world)
Are those who argue for each side of the political divide equally right and equally persuasive?
On certain separate and individual issues, yes.
Are you just too intellectually lazy to pick a side yet still willing to work to be dedicated to that position?
heh, now that would an interesting position. The answer is a qualified no. Qualified because I'm not affiliated with a party, because I dislike the extremes of both parties... perhaps I'm lazy because I don't want to come to terms with one of those extremes. And also there are some issues I just don't know enough about, and one or two that I'm frankly stumped on and can't make up my mind.
Do you support centrist policies specifically because both sides screw things up so badly that you'd like to make sure the more radical portions of either side never get enough votes to do anything major?
Yes, exactly. That's where a wisdom of crowds and gridlock shines. My ideal political configuration is a democratic president and a republican congress.
Is there some specific advantage to you, personally, in maintaining the current political climate instead of seeing it move one way or the other?
Outside of the way specific policy changes would affect most other people in the nation, no.
What about you, why are you so interested?
hehe, no I eliminate exactly 2.15% on each side of the political spectrum to correct for outliers
Exactly. Catholics got burned on the Galileo thing, and still remember that.
PS Intelligent design sucks
I'm a dedicated political centrist. This sounds so fanciful that it smells of bull-shit spin and politicking to me.
Your logic is so flawed and your opinion so uninformed, I'm beginning to wonder if you believe what you're saying or are just trying to get attention.
Your analogy to rentals is incorrect, for a number of reasons. I'm a landlord and have been for years, so I know a couple things about ownership and real estate. Real estate (real property) is governed by **completely separate** laws than personal property (chattel). It is governed by specific laws SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE you live and work in real property and your life can sometimes depend on it.
IIRC there are six rights associated with ownership of real property; as a condition of leasing a property a certain number of these ownership rights are actually transferred to the tenant and are specifically _taken away_ from the landlord - provided the tenant holds up their end of the contract (e.g. paying rent, not destroying the place). This is why a landlord cannot simply walk into a good tenant's property and tell them how to run their lives.
Personal property has no such set of rights and therefore is not subject (nor should it be) to the same laws as real property. If I rent you a motorcycle, I CAN tell you not to take it to a political rally because I disagree with the message, I CAN tell you not to take the bike certain places. Motorcycle riders attending rallies are not a protected class. Our constitutional rights are not absolute, by any means and have always been subject to restrictions - particularly with respect to the intersection of constitutional rights and private property. These are the legal facts.
You are certainly 100% wrong legally, and IMHO wrong entirely.
Are you seriously comparing banning a pic of a stupid kid smoking to expressing your political views on a property where you have leasehold rights?
Fuel cells still use fuel. That fuel will likely be gasoline.
Your timing is impeccable, but your logic is flawed. So you think YOU should be able to tell them how to run their business? Or do you think the government should take care of that for you?
This is their property, they have a right to determine what is appropriate for them and what is not. If they suck and censor stuff that doesn't make sense, they go out of business.
You are parking your property on private property. You are subject to the reasonable (very broadly interpreted) rules of the private property owner. YOU are CHOOSING to put your content on THEIR site.
Thanks for your opinion, but you're making a number of assumptions which are incorrect...
In my (admittedly anecdotal) experience, major websites are remarkably UP 100% of the time. I've never seen Google go down even once in the past few years.
For top level performers, yes. But for those of us who may want to learn to sing while not making asses of ourselves in front of human beings (and paying money in the process), this should work quite nicely.
I'm looking forward to it.
/me thinking about how hard it would be to gather a list of registered voters and fire up Quick Test Pro to automatically generate thousands of letters...
:)
Can't be too hard, right? I could probably have it done in less than a day. Geek power!
And you would know, how?
Are we effective enough and doing all we can do? If I were in charge (and it's probably a good thing I'm not!), I'd chart those "attacks" and look for patterns, I'd intercept other forms of intelligence and correlate them to the cyber-attacks. I'd track and trace these attacks, the origins, and I'd do a lot of very discrete and very skilled poking around of my own, I'd chart the origins and the weaknesses in the origin of attacks, I'd let the attacks continue, because 'who gives a shit', they're just showing their hand and not accomplishing a thing (if we've done our job correctly)... and most of all, I wouldn't tell ANYBODY. So that's the problem right there I guess.
I want SOMEONE that's technically knowledgable, trustworthy and independant to validate... yep, we're being smart. God knows Congress can't do it -- they just don't understand the "tubes", so it might be completely fuckered up due to lack of leadership... and that would be a very, very bad thing. We just don't know.
...throw it outside for a few hours.
I live in AZ and just recently got sick too. Viruses and bacteria love moist, warm places. Dry hot ones will kill them good.
Yeah, wikipedia... I'm liking it less and less nowadays as I actually get in the habit of checking facts against it on other websites. Maybe it'll turn into something great someday...
But there were no mitigating factors on my misspelling of Tutsi's... unless laziness counts. However, I still stand by my comments that we do adhere to higher standards, for the most part. I knew more of the story 8 years or so ago, but the details are now very foggy. The summary is two tribes fought one of the most brutal and disgusting wars seen in the modern era and both sides treated each other like absolute shit.
Al-Qaeda is indeed a nebulous term, I agree, but it's a little more PC than saying "any one of a number of the assholes who are trying to kill us", which is what Al-Qaeda really means, at least to me.
The fact that you're saying that shows we do hold ourselves to a higher standard.
What kind of conditions do you think American prisoners were held in Iraq by Al-Queda? How about the Tootsies in Rwanda when they were held by their enemies?
You know, I truly appreciate the colonel's time in answering these questions, but WE STILL DON'T KNOW what the government and military is up to, or if they're even doing anything, right now, to defend our national interests. "The government works together with other countries and within itself, yada, yada, yada." I've heard it before.
We get cyber-attacked, everyone knows it and he admits it. But what are we DOING about it? I like the platitudes he espouses and I agree with them, but I still don't get the sense we're doing anything smart with these attacks. Obviously, we don't want to get embroiled in a full-scale cyber-war, which would lead to real war, but can't we track, trace and investigate them so we have the ability to immediately and devastatingly attack if, God forbid, we need to go to war with a major power? I've still never heard anything like this from the military folks... I can only hope the NSA is light years ahead of the military.
Eh, I suppose it's not for us (me) to know, but I'd be a little more assured if I knew they were actually doing something, and what that something was (even in a general sense).
To craft an analogy with conventional military operations, you don't need to tell me where you're putting the tanks, I just want proof you're making them.
I'm disappointed he didn't answer the botnet question. I really wondered about that one.
In fact, assuming a deal is struck, these types of coordinated actions from organizations like the G8 will lead to a more "unified" body of world law.
These joint actions will form a basis for future world cooperation (whatever form that will take).
Sure, a little coding is required if you want to do it right, but it's not so bad. It pays as well as, or depending on the market demand, better than a programmer.
Alternatively, you could go into technology management. You usually have one or two programmers that make more than you do, but it's a good living. Once you get into middle-management, you're making more than a programmer.
'We never imagined that the same candidate would show up for both parties.'
Then your algorithm is wrong.
I'm sure a lot of hard R&D went into this, but something you've still got to get on a ladder multiple times for? C'mon.
Am I the only one who thinks home robotics is a VASTLY under-developed market? Yeah, I know how tough AI is, but I still get the nagging feeling we could be doing so much better if someone made a hard run for it. Seriously, look at Windows -- the damn robots don't have to be perfect, they just have to be ok.
Back in the late 70's & 80's the mantra was a computer in every home, today it should be a robot in every home... but I have yet to hear a single person step up and so much as declare it. Imagine the publicity in simply DECLARING such a thing...