So, the fact that the U.S. is reducing its carbon footprint faster than any other major country is a bad thing because they are not doing it the "right way"?
Apparently you do not know the history of Legionnaire's Disease. Legionnaire's Disease is so named because the first known instance was when a bunch of men from the American Legion came down with it after they stayed in a hotel in Philadelphia in 1976 for an American Legion convention. The cause and transmission was a mystery for period of time. Eventually it was discovered that it was transmitted through the air conditioning ducts. They did not get the disease from bathing and showering, or even from drinking water with the disease in it. My understanding is that air conditioning ducts are still the most common way in which the disease is spread.
The thing is that economists ALL postulate how an economic system would work in the ideal world. However, free markets are the only one in which real world experience with it bears an actual resemblance to what the theories of its proponents say it should look like.
She had a surveillance camera which recorded him leaving...with a timestamp on what time that was. Both the camera and the fitbit used NTP to determine what time it was.
No, the whole rationale which proves that free markets are optimal is based on a study of actual history. Please give a real world example of an economic system which is superior to free markets?
Since the person who first posted this posted as an Anoymous Coward and many people do not see such posts, I am going to post most of what they said again.
https://indico.cern.ch/event/714346/overview [indico.cern.ch]
In addition to talks on nuclear and string theory, SM and BSM phenomenology, lattice field theory and cosmology, each day talks and panel discussions will be dedicated to research on gender in academia, with an aim to further the development and implementation of action plans to support women and other minorities in physics.
He was not the person who injected politics into this conference. It was part of what the conference was about.
Well, its not like there is much difference between communists and fascists. They both think that individual liberty must be sacrificed for the good of the collective. The only difference really is how they define the collective.
Unfortunately she never developed such basic skills, and thus ended up having to work as a "reporter"./quote.
You have it backwards, her failure to use such basic skills is what qualified her to be a reporter. She may actually have the skills in question, but she knows that her job depends on not using them.
The spammers count on that sort of behavior by people who are not likely to fall for their scam. When their robocall gets no answer, it moves on to the next and costs them essentially nothing.
When I get those calls I spend as much time as I can spare (usually when I am doing something else that does not require verbal interaction from me) keeping a human on the line as long as I can. That costs the spammers money. It doesn't really cost me anything because they are following a script that does not actually require me to pay attention to what they say and just provide an affirmative noise at the appropriate points, right up until they ask for a credit card, at which point I tell them "No". At which point they usually put on another person who goes through the script again. And if I finish whatever I am working on before they are done, I hang up.
You are correct that Facebook and Twitter are not required to keep anything I, or anyone else, writes. Of course, now that they are in the business of censoring what is posted on their sites they should be held liable for anything which is posted that is slander or libel. They should also be held accountable if someone organizes a destructive flash mob using their media.
The people running Facebook and Twitter are progressives who believe that more government regulation is a good thing (and for them, it is). They are "admitting" this in order to gin up calls for regulations on their industry. Regulations on social media sites would lock new competitors out.
A former senior member of my department used to say, "Our systems are perfect...for obtaining the results we are getting, If we don't like the results, we need to change the system. " If you do not like the results you are getting the question to ask yourself is which part of your system is responsible for those results.
I was going to spend a little time going through the rest of his speech, but realized that if you need that, you missed the point.
I know a few people who work for Amazon in one of their warehouses. Every one of them loves working for Amazon. They believe that they get rewarded for working hard.
As long as you accept that my universal moral principle is a valid generalization of most if not all other common moral principles.
The problem is that I do not accept your "universal moral principle". It is certainly NOT a valid generalization of Judaeo-Christian moral principles. Your "universal moral principle" values the individual not at all. Judaeo-Christian moral principles assert that the individual is infinitely valuable. Your principle accepts the call of the group to sacrifice an individual for the good of the group. Judaeo-Christian principles call for an individual to sacrifice themselves for the good of another individual. The success of Western Civilization is a result of the value it places on the individual, on the fact that it does not value the group at the expense of the individual.
Considering that BMW ONLY owns the Rolls Royce trademark for cars, I would imagine that the Rolls Royce company wins the trademark dispute. This is especially true since when BMW originally purchased the automobile portion of ROlls Royce they neglected to purchase the right to use the trademark and had to negotiate that as a separate deal a few years later.
Thank you, that is the best, most succinct explanation of the problem currently facing social media companies: they want to be free from liability for what people post, but they want to limit what people post to what they consider acceptable.
Slashdot Mirror
So, the fact that the U.S. is reducing its carbon footprint faster than any other major country is a bad thing because they are not doing it the "right way"?
Apparently you do not know the history of Legionnaire's Disease. Legionnaire's Disease is so named because the first known instance was when a bunch of men from the American Legion came down with it after they stayed in a hotel in Philadelphia in 1976 for an American Legion convention. The cause and transmission was a mystery for period of time. Eventually it was discovered that it was transmitted through the air conditioning ducts. They did not get the disease from bathing and showering, or even from drinking water with the disease in it. My understanding is that air conditioning ducts are still the most common way in which the disease is spread.
So, please give a real world example of an economic system which works better than real world free markets?
The thing is that economists ALL postulate how an economic system would work in the ideal world. However, free markets are the only one in which real world experience with it bears an actual resemblance to what the theories of its proponents say it should look like.
She had a surveillance camera which recorded him leaving...with a timestamp on what time that was. Both the camera and the fitbit used NTP to determine what time it was.
No, the whole rationale which proves that free markets are optimal is based on a study of actual history. Please give a real world example of an economic system which is superior to free markets?
https://indico.cern.ch/event/714346/overview [indico.cern.ch] In addition to talks on nuclear and string theory, SM and BSM phenomenology, lattice field theory and cosmology, each day talks and panel discussions will be dedicated to research on gender in academia, with an aim to further the development and implementation of action plans to support women and other minorities in physics.
He was not the person who injected politics into this conference. It was part of what the conference was about.
And the post you responded to is STILL correct.
Well, its not like there is much difference between communists and fascists. They both think that individual liberty must be sacrificed for the good of the collective. The only difference really is how they define the collective.
Unfortunately she never developed such basic skills, and thus ended up having to work as a "reporter"./quote. You have it backwards, her failure to use such basic skills is what qualified her to be a reporter. She may actually have the skills in question, but she knows that her job depends on not using them.
I suspect he is referring to the video which Queen released along with "Bohemian Rhapsody".
The spammers count on that sort of behavior by people who are not likely to fall for their scam. When their robocall gets no answer, it moves on to the next and costs them essentially nothing. When I get those calls I spend as much time as I can spare (usually when I am doing something else that does not require verbal interaction from me) keeping a human on the line as long as I can. That costs the spammers money. It doesn't really cost me anything because they are following a script that does not actually require me to pay attention to what they say and just provide an affirmative noise at the appropriate points, right up until they ask for a credit card, at which point I tell them "No". At which point they usually put on another person who goes through the script again. And if I finish whatever I am working on before they are done, I hang up.
You mean the way that the U.S. Congress passed the ACA?
I take it you missed the articles about "Hands up, Don't shoot."?
You are correct that Facebook and Twitter are not required to keep anything I, or anyone else, writes. Of course, now that they are in the business of censoring what is posted on their sites they should be held liable for anything which is posted that is slander or libel. They should also be held accountable if someone organizes a destructive flash mob using their media.
What is puzzling about it?
The people running Facebook and Twitter are progressives who believe that more government regulation is a good thing (and for them, it is). They are "admitting" this in order to gin up calls for regulations on their industry. Regulations on social media sites would lock new competitors out.
A former senior member of my department used to say, "Our systems are perfect...for obtaining the results we are getting, If we don't like the results, we need to change the system. " If you do not like the results you are getting the question to ask yourself is which part of your system is responsible for those results.
I was going to spend a little time going through the rest of his speech, but realized that if you need that, you missed the point.
I don't want them getting spyware
So, you bought them a computer which comes with spyware preinstalled.
I know a few people who work for Amazon in one of their warehouses. Every one of them loves working for Amazon. They believe that they get rewarded for working hard.
If everyone followed my moral code it would work fine. The fact that some people wish to impose their will on others does not make doing so moral.
I do understand your math. Your moral system allows me to sacrifice YOU for the good of the many. My moral system only allows me to sacrifice myself.
As long as you accept that my universal moral principle is a valid generalization of most if not all other common moral principles.
The problem is that I do not accept your "universal moral principle". It is certainly NOT a valid generalization of Judaeo-Christian moral principles. Your "universal moral principle" values the individual not at all. Judaeo-Christian moral principles assert that the individual is infinitely valuable. Your principle accepts the call of the group to sacrifice an individual for the good of the group. Judaeo-Christian principles call for an individual to sacrifice themselves for the good of another individual. The success of Western Civilization is a result of the value it places on the individual, on the fact that it does not value the group at the expense of the individual.
Considering that BMW ONLY owns the Rolls Royce trademark for cars, I would imagine that the Rolls Royce company wins the trademark dispute. This is especially true since when BMW originally purchased the automobile portion of ROlls Royce they neglected to purchase the right to use the trademark and had to negotiate that as a separate deal a few years later.
The problem is that there exists a law explicitly saying that you are NOT allowed to do that.
Thank you, that is the best, most succinct explanation of the problem currently facing social media companies: they want to be free from liability for what people post, but they want to limit what people post to what they consider acceptable.