No, he fully understands. What he was actually saying was, "It is possible to have encryption with special super secret ways to crack that everyone knows exist but only the government can use."
We need to keep reminding people that if your house has a secret, hidden entrance with no locks so that the police can quickly enter your house in an emergency that everyone knows exists the criminals will search around until they find it. And oh yes, since it is the same on every house, once the criminals find where it is in their house they will know where it is in yours.
NO, it is evidence that he believes those who will hear what he says are idiots and not know that he just said two mutually exclusive things...actually, he said it as part of an effort to convince people that strong encryption and a backdoor for the government to that encryption are not mutually exclusive.
Do you have a citation for that?
All I can find is a $5.9 billion loan to develop electric vehicles. There was an additional $16 billion high interest loan, but this latter was paid off.
Well, of course, that is the same reason they want us to go to electric cars. If you cannot afford to have your own garage, you should not have your own car. That is the whole point of most "AGW solutions", only the elites should be able to travel freely.
So, 400 charging stations for all of Europe is supposed to impress me? That is a drop in the bucket to what it would take to make them not annoyingly inconvenient to find.
Ford declined the bailout that GM and Chrysler received because they had gotten their house in good enough order before things went bad to survive without it.
Ford did not receive any of the bailout loans, so, as far as I am aware, they do not owe the federal government anything.
Really, limiting the power of the parties is simple...stop subsidizing them by using taxpayer dollars to help them select their candidates (government funded primaries and/or caucuses) and eliminate the ballot preferences for the candidates they select (Republican and Democratic nominee automatically on the ballot in some states, all others need to jump through hoops).
I do not entirely agree with what you wrote, but the key point you seemed to be making is right on. The problem with educations is not how MUCH money we are spending. Rather it is HOW we are spending it.
Another point related to this, which no one in the education establishment seems to pay any attention to whatsoever, is that it takes at least 12 years to truly measure the impact of any new teaching methods. In order to really see what impact a new teaching paradigm has on education, you need to have a group of students who started under that paradigm through to graduation from high school. I will add one correction to the above. it may be possible to see a negative impact in less time, but a positive impact can only be confirmed once a group of students has completed the standard 12 years of education. It probably takes several groups of students spending 12 years in the new system to confirm that it is an improvement, but it at least takes one such group.
At several times in my lifetime, the education establishment has gone all in on a new teaching paradigm that has been successful for a handful of students for a handful of years.
I had a recruiter try to recruit me for a job I was interested in, but that was in a location I did not really want to work(bad commute, bad local tax rate). I calculated how much I wanted for the job. Then they asked me how much I was making. I told them that as well. They said, "Well, it will be hard to justify what you are asking based on what you are making." I told them that was irrelevant because what I was asking was what it would take to convince me to take the job. I am glad I did not take that job, I would have been miserable at what they wanted to pay me.
OK, I'm sorry, but I have serious problems extrapolating from one highly industrialized country in the middle of a highly industrialized continent to the entire world. The results they found in Germany are a basis to justify funding to see if the same holds true in the rest of the world, but not a very solid basis to draw a conclusion about what is happening in the rest of the world.
Personally, I am somewhat skeptical of their conclusions because the number of bats and insectivorous birds which I see are significantly higher than when I was a child. While that is anecdotal evidence, I also remember reading a year or two ago about a significant drop in the number of bats as a result of disease...in the article it mentioned that this was devastating because bat populations were finally returning to what was considered near optimal after a low in the late 60s, early 70s.
You are clearly unaware of the fact that gun violence has been on a steady decline in the U.S. while the number of guns in private hands has been on the increase. So your idea that gun ownership has damaged public safety is not supported by the evidence.
Martin Scorsese does not like Rotten Tomatoes (and other aggregators) because they make it harder for people in his position to convince the general public that only "uunwashed plebes" dislike movies which he thinks they should like (usually because if they like it he makes money).
I was young at the time, but I remember seeing the fall of Commodore coming a couple of years out. When the Amiga initially came out I did not pay that much attention to it because by that time Commodore had burnt its bridges with too many people in the industry. By the time I learned how good the Amiga was it was obvious that Commodore had either failed to understand why it had such an atrocious reputation in the computing industry or did not know how to change.
Commodore as a company was already on life support when it bought Amiga. Amiga brought new life which bought it a few more years, but they never healed the underlying problem which had gotten Commodore into that position in the first place.
Actually, the statistics suggest exactly what the poster you responded to said. In 2007 (the last year I saw statistics for), the 5 year prognosis for someone in the U.S. diagnosed for any serious disease was in the top 5 for any country in the world (depending on the disease), and number 1 for many of them. No other country came close to that.
For most of those farmhands, moving to town was an even trade. Even in the U.S., where the average pre-industrial farmhand had a better life than most of the same in the rest of the world, most of those who suffered the worst of the early industrial age came from places where, at worst, the industrial city was no better than what they would have experienced without industrialization.
No, by "better" I mean not living wondering if you are going to have enough to eat today. Throughout history, the lot of the majority of people was to spend their time trying to find enough food to eat (and for a very large percentage of the the population, failing).
Of course, your form of historical story-telling forgets how much better life got for people on the bottom end after these changes happened. You should Google "The $3000 shirt."
Except that not all of the organizations which constitute a country's trade and industry are businesses. Some of them are non-profit organizations. The overwhelming majority of the elements of a country's trade and industry under capitalism will be run for profit...of course that is also true under communism and socialism. Under communism and socialism the people who profit from the country's trade and industry will be solely those who are politically connected.
Slashdot Mirror
No, he fully understands. What he was actually saying was, "It is possible to have encryption with special super secret ways to crack that everyone knows exist but only the government can use." We need to keep reminding people that if your house has a secret, hidden entrance with no locks so that the police can quickly enter your house in an emergency that everyone knows exists the criminals will search around until they find it. And oh yes, since it is the same on every house, once the criminals find where it is in their house they will know where it is in yours.
NO, it is evidence that he believes those who will hear what he says are idiots and not know that he just said two mutually exclusive things...actually, he said it as part of an effort to convince people that strong encryption and a backdoor for the government to that encryption are not mutually exclusive.
Do you have a citation for that? All I can find is a $5.9 billion loan to develop electric vehicles. There was an additional $16 billion high interest loan, but this latter was paid off.
Well, of course, that is the same reason they want us to go to electric cars. If you cannot afford to have your own garage, you should not have your own car. That is the whole point of most "AGW solutions", only the elites should be able to travel freely.
So, 400 charging stations for all of Europe is supposed to impress me? That is a drop in the bucket to what it would take to make them not annoyingly inconvenient to find.
Ford declined the bailout that GM and Chrysler received because they had gotten their house in good enough order before things went bad to survive without it.
Ford did not receive any of the bailout loans, so, as far as I am aware, they do not owe the federal government anything.
Please list the specific government subsidies which you believe make living in the U.S. less expensive than elsewhere.
Then we can evaluate whether it is government subsidies in the U.S. or government charges and regulations elsewhere which make the difference.
Really, limiting the power of the parties is simple...stop subsidizing them by using taxpayer dollars to help them select their candidates (government funded primaries and/or caucuses) and eliminate the ballot preferences for the candidates they select (Republican and Democratic nominee automatically on the ballot in some states, all others need to jump through hoops).
I do not entirely agree with what you wrote, but the key point you seemed to be making is right on. The problem with educations is not how MUCH money we are spending. Rather it is HOW we are spending it.
Another point related to this, which no one in the education establishment seems to pay any attention to whatsoever, is that it takes at least 12 years to truly measure the impact of any new teaching methods. In order to really see what impact a new teaching paradigm has on education, you need to have a group of students who started under that paradigm through to graduation from high school. I will add one correction to the above. it may be possible to see a negative impact in less time, but a positive impact can only be confirmed once a group of students has completed the standard 12 years of education. It probably takes several groups of students spending 12 years in the new system to confirm that it is an improvement, but it at least takes one such group.
At several times in my lifetime, the education establishment has gone all in on a new teaching paradigm that has been successful for a handful of students for a handful of years.
Sorry, only Easter Island holds up...of course NONE of those was an ancient civilization.
I am sorry, but inverse correlation is pretty strong evidence AGAINST causation.
I had a recruiter try to recruit me for a job I was interested in, but that was in a location I did not really want to work(bad commute, bad local tax rate). I calculated how much I wanted for the job. Then they asked me how much I was making. I told them that as well. They said, "Well, it will be hard to justify what you are asking based on what you are making." I told them that was irrelevant because what I was asking was what it would take to convince me to take the job. I am glad I did not take that job, I would have been miserable at what they wanted to pay me.
OK, I'm sorry, but I have serious problems extrapolating from one highly industrialized country in the middle of a highly industrialized continent to the entire world. The results they found in Germany are a basis to justify funding to see if the same holds true in the rest of the world, but not a very solid basis to draw a conclusion about what is happening in the rest of the world.
Personally, I am somewhat skeptical of their conclusions because the number of bats and insectivorous birds which I see are significantly higher than when I was a child. While that is anecdotal evidence, I also remember reading a year or two ago about a significant drop in the number of bats as a result of disease...in the article it mentioned that this was devastating because bat populations were finally returning to what was considered near optimal after a low in the late 60s, early 70s.
Please name more than two ancient civilizations which disappeared because they depleted their immediate environment of things they needed to live.
No, Bill Cosby
Not quite true. Merchants are allowed to offer a discount for cash. There are still some gas stations near me which do so.
You are clearly unaware of the fact that gun violence has been on a steady decline in the U.S. while the number of guns in private hands has been on the increase. So your idea that gun ownership has damaged public safety is not supported by the evidence.
Hey, that "Employee" went to work for the last recruiting company to contact me.
Martin Scorsese does not like Rotten Tomatoes (and other aggregators) because they make it harder for people in his position to convince the general public that only "uunwashed plebes" dislike movies which he thinks they should like (usually because if they like it he makes money).
I was young at the time, but I remember seeing the fall of Commodore coming a couple of years out. When the Amiga initially came out I did not pay that much attention to it because by that time Commodore had burnt its bridges with too many people in the industry. By the time I learned how good the Amiga was it was obvious that Commodore had either failed to understand why it had such an atrocious reputation in the computing industry or did not know how to change. Commodore as a company was already on life support when it bought Amiga. Amiga brought new life which bought it a few more years, but they never healed the underlying problem which had gotten Commodore into that position in the first place.
Actually, the statistics suggest exactly what the poster you responded to said. In 2007 (the last year I saw statistics for), the 5 year prognosis for someone in the U.S. diagnosed for any serious disease was in the top 5 for any country in the world (depending on the disease), and number 1 for many of them. No other country came close to that.
For most of those farmhands, moving to town was an even trade. Even in the U.S., where the average pre-industrial farmhand had a better life than most of the same in the rest of the world, most of those who suffered the worst of the early industrial age came from places where, at worst, the industrial city was no better than what they would have experienced without industrialization.
No, by "better" I mean not living wondering if you are going to have enough to eat today. Throughout history, the lot of the majority of people was to spend their time trying to find enough food to eat (and for a very large percentage of the the population, failing).
Of course, your form of historical story-telling forgets how much better life got for people on the bottom end after these changes happened. You should Google "The $3000 shirt."
Except that not all of the organizations which constitute a country's trade and industry are businesses. Some of them are non-profit organizations. The overwhelming majority of the elements of a country's trade and industry under capitalism will be run for profit...of course that is also true under communism and socialism. Under communism and socialism the people who profit from the country's trade and industry will be solely those who are politically connected.