That isn't a threat unless the protesters plans are a threat already, this is only a tool to better facilitate movement of groups. As for "threats to security", I don't know if I would really go that far. Stuff may get broken at protest every once in a while but it really isn't a huge deal the the press likes to make out.
The US is a Federation, not a Confederation, or at least much closer to a federation than a confederation. We got rid of the Articles of Confederacy and adopted the Constitution. During the Civil War the South seceded and formed a confederacy. The constitution gives no procedure for secesion so the war was fairly justified.
I agree whole-heartedly with you about elections that aren't regularly scheduled, but what do you mean by 'it's worked for us"? If you mean that we're still using it, then yeah I guess it's worked. But considering the state of our political debate these days, or lack thereof, it hasn't helped do anything except keep the country whole. Now If you judge how well a system works by those criteria I think you'll end up saying some countries that are pretty damn horrible 'work'.
If you have statistics on it I'd apreciate a link or something.
And i mean that, i'm not being a smarmy ass like most people here, I'm a political science major and I've had a had time finding decent demographic data on the net.
It's becoming a bigger problem lately as well, like in the last month. I meta-moderate a lot(and hardly ever moderate) and I've noticed WAY too many people getting modded down with completely wrong reasons and, worse, for absolutely no reason that I can tell.
P.S. I mainly don't moderate because firebird is all janky with Slashdot when I have mod points.
well, if no one was able to prove a negative then he must be right. Learn som damn logic; if you want to quote figures, be able to back them up with citation.
Why does it matter who triggered it if the choice of government is suppose to be made by the people of the country? By that rationale Google should be doing more to help Chinese dissidents, whom are trying to bring down the great firewall of china. How much death has to happen before one can actually help free people from oppression?
So you're for censorship merely because you believe in cultural reletavism. To say that all responsibility for the government of a nation lies with the people of said nation is absurd. Is it at all possible, in your world view, to realize that there are a shit load of outside influences already. Add to that the fact that instituting changes in government is not an option in many cases, and certainly not without some sort of outside help.
Would you have had the French stay out of the American Revolution?
I'd also like to make clear that I am not against companies trading in China, at least not in principle. The point I'm trying to make is that if China wants the internet, that's what they will get, all of it; Porn and dissent included. It is absurd for Google to pretend like the rest of the internet doesn't exist, even if the Chinese cannot get to the sites.
One last question: Did you oppose the war in Iraq?
Why? Because you merely believe that they should have access to the same type of sources that you do? That is not a reason why a culture should be changed via pressure from a company based in another jurisdiction.
The reason that it would be better if the censorship is apparent is because the chinese public, not the leaders, should have a some knowledge of whats being censored so *they* can decide if they want access to the same information. As for 'pressure', google doesn't pressure anyone, they help search the web. If that manages to impact a culture or government, so be it. If the Chinese want on the internet they're going to have to deal with their people reading things the government doesn't want them to read.
You mean, "how could they possibly not want to be like me?" Believe it or not, there are billions of people who dont live like you, dont want to, and have made this choice conciously. The first step to understanding another persons culture is to accept that they can be different to you AND equal. As soon as you do this, you cannot talk about changing China to suit yourself, and your personally held opinions.
If these people have made the choice conciously then why does it matter if they have access to other information. the rest of this is a complete nonsequitor. You can accept that the Chinese culture is different and equal and talk about helping china change. Of course you dropped that little 'to suit yourself' in there, which as far as I can see doesn't come into play ever.
By saying that they deserve access to what you get, you are superimposing your own standards on people you dont even know. There are cultures where unlimited access to, for example, pr0n is not something to be enjoyed, but something to be stomped on, and supressed. They are not wrong for trying to block it and anything else that they dont want, and Google is not evil for obeying those laws.
You seem to be continuing to argue that the laws of a government are somehow always directly representative of the country governed; this is not, however, the case. That the whole point of this.
My mom is a teacher as well and these numbers seem about right. Remember its wage + benefits, not just wage. These days medical and pension plans are expensive. Also, it isn't clear whether this number is before or after taxes.
The big problem with education in the US is that the money doesn't actually get to the classrooms. It's all tied up in the administration. All the damn managers get paid *way* too much while teachers make relatively little and spend far too much on supplies.
I'm advocating for it to be legal because it's a horrible law that causes more problems than smoking pot does. I'm advocating for it to be legal because I see no good reason for it to be otherwise. My personal habits shouldn't matter in my assesment of the justness or unjustness of a law.
As for the rest of your rant, quit putting words in my mouth. I never said pot was some great thing that makes the world a better place, all I said was that it is possible for someone to smoke pot regularly and still have a productive, happy life.
You seem to be under the impression that because you turned into a lazy idiot while stoned that everyone will, and that just isn't the case. The prime reason that I hardly ever smoke pot is because I really don't like being stoned, it makes me nervous and slow. That is not how everyone reacts to it.
So quit trying to make everyone who is for legalized pot into some sort of go-go-marijuana stoner. That just isn't the case, and moreover the only arguement I ever really heard you give against legalizing it was that you might smoke it again. You must be mighty weak willed if merely the knowledge that pot was availible in stares would so tempt you.
Considering I don't smoke pot, or hardly smoke it ever, you really aren't doing anything for me. But as far as potential is concerned, I suppose you think Carl Sagan didn't fulfil his? Maybe you need to experience a little more before you start throwing judgements around about shit you obviously know nothing about.
Another physics problem with the oil supply is the energy return we get. When oil requires more energy to extract than it provides we will essentially run out of supplies.
Slashdot Mirror
But we just smoked in the stairwell at HOPE. Luckily we were only on the rook at night; they can't ID you from your infrared signature, can they?
Notice they talk about this after exempting satelite images from FOIA requests.
That isn't a threat unless the protesters plans are a threat already, this is only a tool to better facilitate movement of groups. As for "threats to security", I don't know if I would really go that far. Stuff may get broken at protest every once in a while but it really isn't a huge deal the the press likes to make out.
Its not the services that are illegal, its what everyone's doing on them.
you are correct. Texas also has the option to split into 5 seperate states.
The US is a Federation, not a Confederation, or at least much closer to a federation than a confederation. We got rid of the Articles of Confederacy and adopted the Constitution. During the Civil War the South seceded and formed a confederacy. The constitution gives no procedure for secesion so the war was fairly justified.
I agree whole-heartedly with you about elections that aren't regularly scheduled, but what do you mean by 'it's worked for us"? If you mean that we're still using it, then yeah I guess it's worked. But considering the state of our political debate these days, or lack thereof, it hasn't helped do anything except keep the country whole. Now If you judge how well a system works by those criteria I think you'll end up saying some countries that are pretty damn horrible 'work'.
If you have statistics on it I'd apreciate a link or something.
And i mean that, i'm not being a smarmy ass like most people here, I'm a political science major and I've had a had time finding decent demographic data on the net.
It's becoming a bigger problem lately as well, like in the last month. I meta-moderate a lot(and hardly ever moderate) and I've noticed WAY too many people getting modded down with completely wrong reasons and, worse, for absolutely no reason that I can tell.
P.S. I mainly don't moderate because firebird is all janky with Slashdot when I have mod points.
well, if no one was able to prove a negative then he must be right. Learn som damn logic; if you want to quote figures, be able to back them up with citation.
Why does it matter who triggered it if the choice of government is suppose to be made by the people of the country? By that rationale Google should be doing more to help Chinese dissidents, whom are trying to bring down the great firewall of china. How much death has to happen before one can actually help free people from oppression?
Would you have had the French stay out of the American Revolution?
I'd also like to make clear that I am not against companies trading in China, at least not in principle. The point I'm trying to make is that if China wants the internet, that's what they will get, all of it; Porn and dissent included. It is absurd for Google to pretend like the rest of the internet doesn't exist, even if the Chinese cannot get to the sites.
One last question: Did you oppose the war in Iraq?
Why? Because you merely believe that they should have access to the same type of sources that you do? That is not a reason why a culture should be changed via pressure from a company based in another jurisdiction.
The reason that it would be better if the censorship is apparent is because the chinese public, not the leaders, should have a some knowledge of whats being censored so *they* can decide if they want access to the same information. As for 'pressure', google doesn't pressure anyone, they help search the web. If that manages to impact a culture or government, so be it. If the Chinese want on the internet they're going to have to deal with their people reading things the government doesn't want them to read.
You mean, "how could they possibly not want to be like me?" Believe it or not, there are billions of people who dont live like you, dont want to, and have made this choice conciously. The first step to understanding another persons culture is to accept that they can be different to you AND equal. As soon as you do this, you cannot talk about changing China to suit yourself, and your personally held opinions.
If these people have made the choice conciously then why does it matter if they have access to other information. the rest of this is a complete nonsequitor. You can accept that the Chinese culture is different and equal and talk about helping china change. Of course you dropped that little 'to suit yourself' in there, which as far as I can see doesn't come into play ever.
By saying that they deserve access to what you get, you are superimposing your own standards on people you dont even know. There are cultures where unlimited access to, for example, pr0n is not something to be enjoyed, but something to be stomped on, and supressed. They are not wrong for trying to block it and anything else that they dont want, and Google is not evil for obeying those laws.
You seem to be continuing to argue that the laws of a government are somehow always directly representative of the country governed; this is not, however, the case. That the whole point of this.
My mom is a teacher as well and these numbers seem about right. Remember its wage + benefits, not just wage. These days medical and pension plans are expensive. Also, it isn't clear whether this number is before or after taxes.
The big problem with education in the US is that the money doesn't actually get to the classrooms. It's all tied up in the administration. All the damn managers get paid *way* too much while teachers make relatively little and spend far too much on supplies.
It's up to around 410 billion a year now, and closer to 550 if you count the money being spent on Iraq, that isn't 'officially' part of the budget.
God I hate politicians.
Great job of not addressing my point at all.
I'm advocating for it to be legal because it's a horrible law that causes more problems than smoking pot does. I'm advocating for it to be legal because I see no good reason for it to be otherwise. My personal habits shouldn't matter in my assesment of the justness or unjustness of a law.
As for the rest of your rant, quit putting words in my mouth. I never said pot was some great thing that makes the world a better place, all I said was that it is possible for someone to smoke pot regularly and still have a productive, happy life.
You seem to be under the impression that because you turned into a lazy idiot while stoned that everyone will, and that just isn't the case. The prime reason that I hardly ever smoke pot is because I really don't like being stoned, it makes me nervous and slow. That is not how everyone reacts to it.
So quit trying to make everyone who is for legalized pot into some sort of go-go-marijuana stoner. That just isn't the case, and moreover the only arguement I ever really heard you give against legalizing it was that you might smoke it again. You must be mighty weak willed if merely the knowledge that pot was availible in stares would so tempt you.
Considering I don't smoke pot, or hardly smoke it ever, you really aren't doing anything for me. But as far as potential is concerned, I suppose you think Carl Sagan didn't fulfil his? Maybe you need to experience a little more before you start throwing judgements around about shit you obviously know nothing about.
If you think the Church of the SubGenius is a joke, You sure as hell will never get it.
Yeah, it drags you down. Thats why my father, a 60 year old who has smoked pot since he was like 20, makes a 6 figure salary.
Quit being so naive about the effects of drugs, most of what you read in the paper and hear from the governmernt is bullshit.
If Bush is reelected and institutes a draft the cities will burn. It'll make the sixties look like a nice little vacation.
An island of Dinosaurs...
IN SPACE!!!!!
Start production NOW I tell you!
do you meta-moderate? I get to moderate all the time.
Unfortunately it seems someone has modded you down for being "offtopic". Great system, this democracy here.
Another physics problem with the oil supply is the energy return we get. When oil requires more energy to extract than it provides we will essentially run out of supplies.
"A witty saying proves nothing"
-Voltaire