Since when did Holocaust denial become a reason for the United States to attack another nation state? I thought the attitude of the U.S. people was supposed to be more along the lines of : "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."?
I actually find it quite distasteful to use the Holocaust as an excuse for a war that would result in the deaths of millions of people. And it appears I'm not the only one. Obscene: Using the Holocaust to Justify War With Iran .
it's really the Turks and the Pakistanis that should feel insulted.
Why? Turkey has been part of NATO for decades and the US Air Force planes and several thousand personnel are based in Incirlik base. Regarding Pakistan, both CIA and USAF drones and personnel are based at Shamsi air base (or at least were until last month following the drone bomb attack on the Pakistan Army).
They've stood up to the US since 1980 without nukes.
1. That policy didn't work out so well for their neighbor governments of Iraq & Afghanistan, who were both invaded and toppled by the U.S. Oddly enough, standing up to the U.S. whilst having nukes has worked out for N. Korea and Pakistan.
2. Some Israelis are calling for a preemptive nuclear strike and U.S. has threatened a nuclear first strike. Wanting to acquire nuclear capability when faced with such threats is logical.
"When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, Bush "directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
And according to The Register, who quote some reseller, Samsung's Galaxy S2 is selling 100x more than Lumia Having said that, I am not convinced that stats from a single reseller really represent the market as a whole...
18 suicides per million workers at Foxconn? OK, that's very sad, but the Chinese national average is 220 per million.
These two figures are not directly comparable. One is for a predominantly young female employed workforce and the other is for the entire nation that includes mentally ill drunks drug addicts elderly etc.
Average salary for production workers at Foxconn only $6,000?
Average salary has been reported to be $150 a month. Where does this $6k come from?
$17 a day? http://m.cnet.com/Article.rbml?nid=20006559&cid=null&bcid=&bid=-37 suggests salary is about $170 per month so more like $5 a day, and how many hours do they work? 100 hours a week would not be unusual for Chinese factory labor. So hourly rate is many times less than US equivalent.
He was charged and convicted for possession of the information, which is in itself a crime in the UK. He was not charged with intent or conspiracy. He would've been just as guilty without the anonymous letter and shopping list - they were not relevant to the prosecution case.
Having the information is in itself a crime in the UK. That is what he was prosecuted and found guilty of. He would've been just as guilty without the shopping list and anonymous letter. He was not charged with intent or conspiracy.
The shopping list and letter were irrelevant to the prosecution case. This was not about intent - the police admitted they didn't know his intent. He was prosecuted and found guilty of having the information regarding bomb making and ricin, which is a crime in itself in the UK.
Because you can choose to switch union and the unions don't conspire to stop that happening. You can even be a member of more than one union, and they don't conspire to stop that, either.
It is short sighted to assume that this is just about well paid programmers. Employment law applies to all corporations. If it were legal for high value employers like Google etc. to conspire to drive down wages, then it would also be legal for low value employers to conspire and do likewise. It could easily be the case that, in certain geographic regions or areas of industry, there would only be a few potential employers for certain classes of worker, and collusion between these employers could drive wages down to minimum wage, or even down to an unliveable wage for places that don't have a minimum.
The market for employees is just like any other functioning market. Companies colluding to reduce competition in the marke makes the market less efficient. If you are an economist, or just a person who favors capitalism and competitive markets, then you should be against this.
My understanding is that the GPU supports hardware decoding of xvid/mpeg2/h264 etc. The issue is licensing the patents from MPEG-LA. The cost of licensing a codec is too high to license them all for every Pi sold: the cost of licensing AAC alone is 4% of the total price of the board. So, either there will be a hardware version that comes with all the codecs (and costs a lot more), or there will a software codec pack that you can pay to download. Either way, the codecs are going to be leaked eventually, so I guess the solution for most people will be the familar Linux "user run codec install script" that fetches the codecs from some random server so the distro isn't responsible. Commercial media players based on Pi hardware will have to pay for the licenses.
Forget teaching kids how to program; the $25 Raspberry Pi computer might just be the home entertainment STB and compact gaming console we’ve been waiting for. The low-cost computer – and its $35 sibling – should deliver double the graphical performance of the iPhone 4S, according to executive director (and Broadcom SoC architect) Eben Upton, telling Digital Foundry that not only does the BCM2835 GPU at the heart of the Raspberry Pi roast Apple’s latest smartphone, but it thoroughly whups NVIDIA’s Tegra 2.
Apple would love to occupy the corporate and public sector desktop market. It would mean vast amounts of guaranteed income every year.
Linux has been pushed as the 'ideal' public service desktop for years and years and years.
Really? I see the opposite - most Linux vendors have pretty much ignored the desktop and focused on niche areas like embedded systems, servers, HPC, etc. IBM said chasing Windows on the desktop was a deadend, and Red Hat famously pulled away from focusing on the desktop years ago. Ubuntu seems to have been the only one that has maintained a desktop focus, and they have an estimated 13 million or so users.
Judging from all my acquaintances
Anecdotal evidence and a biased sample - your colleagues are probably in the top 1% of global income, and the kind of people who don't mind spending large amounts of cash on their personal computers.
How many *new* netbooks running Linux have you seen for sale in the last 2 years?
The netbook market fell for various reasons. The market changed - people adopted tablets, and full-featured laptops became smaller, faster, and cheaper than they were. MS began selling XP again and put pressure on netbook manufacturers to adopt it. Netbooks also, oddly, became more expensive as they became more like laptops in response to the increased hardware requirements. The choice of Linux distros was often odd as well - instead of partnering with, say, Ubuntu, many of the netbook makers chose to pre-install random Chinese distributions. The rise of smart phones also played a huge part - why carry a larger netbook around with you, when you can do email, facebook, web browsing etc. sufficiently well from your phone, that fits in your pocket and weighs a hundred grams?
Yeah, it's an interesting idea. If it works well, it means people are going to be using the mouse less - instead of click to open a menu, then move to open submenu, and repeating until you get to the action you want - you are just going to be hitting some keyboard hot key and typing "edge fil" and then selecting from the drop down options. It might even be useful for accessibility. OTOH, it is not what people are used to, and there are going to be people complaining. But it is only a default desktop, and people should remember that there are plenty of other desktop options for Ubuntu, and distributions like Kubuntu and Xubuntu make installing them a breeze. I'm a bit bored of the repeated rants against Unity on Slashdot - if you want Ubuntu with a traditional w95 style desktop, then just install Xubuntu. Job done. Multiple desktops is one of the strengths of Linux, not a weakness - does a teenage tablet user really want the same desktop as a seasoned systems programmer? Probably not. Different people, different desktops.
(I don't use Unity, but here's an interesting thing... I was at a friend's place recently, and he said "Hey have you seen this great new Ubuntu?" I was like "You mean the new Unity desktop?" and he said "I don't know, but look at this..." and proceeded to show me some of the features, and turns out he *loves* Unity - the visual effects, in particular, the left-side app bar, with app icons that glow or something to notify you of events like new emails that require attention etc. Canonical must be doing something right, for some people.)
The Linux desktop went nowhere. 40K desktops in Spain, 14K in Munich and 90K by the French police are by themselves respectable numbers.
By that logic, the Apple desktop also "went nowhere", since there were no mass migrations of government departments to Apple computers. Or maybe there is another explanation? Maybe governments are very conservative in their IT procurement, and by default choose Microsoft, often without even bothering to consider other options? For obvious reasons, it is difficult to estimate the exact number of Linux desktop users, but according to Microsoft, Linux has a greater desktop share than the Mac. Here's are some interesting comments from a report from 2010: Debunking the 1% Myth
If we do the math we find that due to netbooks alone Linux captured nearly 6% of the desktop market in 2009. In order to reach a total number we need to add larger laptops and desktops both from companies like Dell, HP (their business line) as well as smaller boutique vendors.
Additional confirmation of the growth in Linux desktop market share last year came from an unlikely source: Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. Using a slide to visualize OS market share Ballmer had Linux desktop market share as a slightly larger slice of the pie than MacOS. Nobody considers Apple insignificant on the desktop and neither is Linux. Here is, in part, what Mr. Ballmer had to say about Linux on the desktop and the competition for Windows:
Linux, you could see on the slide, and Apple has certainly increased its share somewhat.
[...]
I think depending on how you look at it, Apple has probably increased its market share over the last year or so by a point or more. And a point of market share on a number that's about 300 million is interesting. It's an interesting amount of market share, while not necessarily being as dramatic as people would think, but we're very focused in on both Apple as a competitor, and Linux as a competitor."
Does anyone believe that Microsoft would see Linux as a serious competitor is Linux had captured just 1% of the market? That doesn't seem very likely, does it? All the figures I have quoted so far represent sales of systems preloaded with a given operating system: Windows, MacOS or Linux. They do not represent actual usage. If you go down to the local brick and mortar computer shop or big box retailer, buy a system with Windows, wipe the hard drive and install Linux that still counts as a Windows system, not a Linux system.
It's been nine years and more money than budgeted and they've converted 65% of the computers.
On the bright side: they have migrated 100% of systems to Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, and ODF.
more money than budgeted
Yes, but this would almost certainly have also been the case if they were migrating all their systems to a more recent release of Windows. They were running enterprise wide NT4. The comparison point should not be against the pre-existing TCO, but against the alternative cost of migrating to a more recent Windows. "We do not have a goal to compare total cost of ownership. Microsoft stopped supporting NT 4.0, so we must migrate." limux project leader. How much do you think a government migration of 15,000 NT4 desktops, plus Office and other software to a recent release of Windows would cost? Due to increased hardware requirements of new Windows, such a migration would also certainly require new PCs, which would further increase costs. Maybe the cost of migration would be the same, less, or more, but in the long term freeing themselves of costly vendor lock-in and the Microsoft upgrade treadmill should result in substantial cost savings
"Flip flopping" just means changing your mind, right? Changing your mind should only be viewed negatively when it is done with dishonest intent - to deceive and manipulate others, or to act against one's own core beliefs. We live in a complicated world, and there are genuine, complex issues that educated adults can disagree on. The ability to comprehend and reason from multiple points of view, and modify your own position accordingly, ought to be seen as a strength rather than a weakness.
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Ron Paul has been groped, due to a metal brace from an old war injury. He says, "I HATE it, but what choice do I have?"
Am I the only person who doesn't care about getting a pat down? It takes like 10 seconds, and then you are waved through security. As opposed to a wand, where it takes longer, and if it beeps and there is a problem touching you, you get taken to a private room. When I've had the choice between wand or pat down, I've always chosen pat down. And when I've experienced it or seen it, it's always been same-sex, so it's about the most unsexual experience you can imagine.
I can understand getting pissed if you're a black guy living in an inner city who gets a pat down every other day in a police "stop and search" procedure, but most people fly very infrequently, certainly not enough to get worked up over. I really don't get it. I guess I just don't freak out very much when people touch me.
"don't fly. You can drive, take a train, or walk."
Actually, I would've thought this would be the libertarian answer. Or fly privately (TSA doesn't screen at private airports, right?).
Like many things, medical regulations are often designed to protect the people who are unable, for whatever reason, to take care of themselves. Someone like yourself is probably responsible enough and qualified enough to handle your own medication and measurement of the side effects. However, for every responsible and educated person like yourself, there will be several people who aren't responsibile and educated enough to self-medicate. There are also many people who, in the absense of a prescription system, would accept drug advertising as fact, and proceed to self-diagnose, and then buy and apply inappropriate medications. I would like to see a system where people like yourself can opt-out and self-medicate to a large degree, but the system also needs to recognise that the majority of peole are not educated well enough to be given uncontrolled access to the contents of a modern pharmacy, and that we don't want a return to the era of unqualified quack-doctor-advertisements telling patients that random drug X will "help" cure their cancer.
(Incidentally, I came across this interesting blog post recently : A blog in support of stupid people’s rights. The list of "stupid" people probably includes a large number of the population at some time in their lives).
You link to an article that explains that in one particular region of the Sahara the localised effects of climate change may have caused more rain, and hence desert greening. This does not mean that the same thing will occur everywhere in the world. In fact, desertification is increasing. Consider some other recent evidence:
Predicting the world's overall changes in food production in response to elevated CO2 is virtually impossible. Global production is expected to rise until the increase in local average temperatures exceeds 3C, but then start to fall. In tropical and dry regions increases of just 1 to 2C are expected to lead to falls in production. In marginal lands where water is the greatest constraint, which includes much of the developing world but also regions such as the western US, the losses may greatly exceed the gains.Climate myths: Higher CO2 levels will boost plant growth and food production
What is absurd? Why is it necessary for the government to regulate marriage? If we can use contract law to manage arbitrary contractual arrangements (which we can), then why can't a marriage be handled in the same way? Same-sex marriages, polygamous marriages etc. would all be possible under such a system. Why should the government be allowed to tell you who you are allowed to marry? If you really do want to go around saying you're married to a videogame character, then what business is it of the government?
you might as well argue that a woman shouldn't be allowed to marry a man with a small penis like you
You are the one who supports the right of the government to enforce such arbitrary rules on marriage. I am the one who thinks that a woman should be free to do whatever she wants as long as it doesn't harm another person. Which one of those is the absurd position? (hint: it's the one where the government gets to define marriage, and therefore has the power to take away your freedom and ban interracial marriage, homosexual marriage etc.)
Exactly. If someone wants to, say, marry the Berlin Wall then do you really want your tax money used to try and stop her? Why do you care? As long as the relationship isn't abusive and nobody is being harmed, then why would you ever care that someone may choose to marry their pillow? Or a dog? Or even the man who married himself? Or a videogame character? Why do people care? Haven't governments got more important things to spend their tax payers money on, instead of wasting time and money regulating what is basically a social contract?
Slashdot Mirror
Since when did Holocaust denial become a reason for the United States to attack another nation state? I thought the attitude of the U.S. people was supposed to be more along the lines of : "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."?
I actually find it quite distasteful to use the Holocaust as an excuse for a war that would result in the deaths of millions of people. And it appears I'm not the only one. Obscene: Using the Holocaust to Justify War With Iran .
it's really the Turks and the Pakistanis that should feel insulted.
Why? Turkey has been part of NATO for decades and the US Air Force planes and several thousand personnel are based in Incirlik base. Regarding Pakistan, both CIA and USAF drones and personnel are based at Shamsi air base (or at least were until last month following the drone bomb attack on the Pakistan Army).
They've stood up to the US since 1980 without nukes.
1. That policy didn't work out so well for their neighbor governments of Iraq & Afghanistan, who were both invaded and toppled by the U.S. Oddly enough, standing up to the U.S. whilst having nukes has worked out for N. Korea and Pakistan.
2. Some Israelis are calling for a preemptive nuclear strike and U.S. has threatened a nuclear first strike. Wanting to acquire nuclear capability when faced with such threats is logical.
"When specifically questioned about the potential use of nuclear weapons against Iran, President Bush claimed that "All options were on the table". According to the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientist, Bush "directly threatened Iran with a preemptive nuclear strike. It is hard to read his reply in any other way." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran
And according to The Register, who quote some reseller, Samsung's Galaxy S2 is selling 100x more than Lumia Having said that, I am not convinced that stats from a single reseller really represent the market as a whole...
18 suicides per million workers at Foxconn? OK, that's very sad, but the Chinese national average is 220 per million.
These two figures are not directly comparable. One is for a predominantly young female employed workforce and the other is for the entire nation that includes mentally ill drunks drug addicts elderly etc.
Average salary for production workers at Foxconn only $6,000?
Average salary has been reported to be $150 a month. Where does this $6k come from?
$17 a day? http://m.cnet.com/Article.rbml?nid=20006559&cid=null&bcid=&bid=-37 suggests salary is about $170 per month so more like $5 a day, and how many hours do they work? 100 hours a week would not be unusual for Chinese factory labor. So hourly rate is many times less than US equivalent.
He was charged and convicted for possession of the information, which is in itself a crime in the UK. He was not charged with intent or conspiracy. He would've been just as guilty without the anonymous letter and shopping list - they were not relevant to the prosecution case.
Having the information is in itself a crime in the UK. That is what he was prosecuted and found guilty of. He would've been just as guilty without the shopping list and anonymous letter. He was not charged with intent or conspiracy.
The shopping list and letter were irrelevant to the prosecution case. This was not about intent - the police admitted they didn't know his intent. He was prosecuted and found guilty of having the information regarding bomb making and ricin, which is a crime in itself in the UK.
Because you can choose to switch union and the unions don't conspire to stop that happening. You can even be a member of more than one union, and they don't conspire to stop that, either.
It is short sighted to assume that this is just about well paid programmers. Employment law applies to all corporations. If it were legal for high value employers like Google etc. to conspire to drive down wages, then it would also be legal for low value employers to conspire and do likewise. It could easily be the case that, in certain geographic regions or areas of industry, there would only be a few potential employers for certain classes of worker, and collusion between these employers could drive wages down to minimum wage, or even down to an unliveable wage for places that don't have a minimum.
The market for employees is just like any other functioning market. Companies colluding to reduce competition in the marke makes the market less efficient. If you are an economist, or just a person who favors capitalism and competitive markets, then you should be against this.
My understanding is that the GPU supports hardware decoding of xvid/mpeg2/h264 etc. The issue is licensing the patents from MPEG-LA. The cost of licensing a codec is too high to license them all for every Pi sold: the cost of licensing AAC alone is 4% of the total price of the board. So, either there will be a hardware version that comes with all the codecs (and costs a lot more), or there will a software codec pack that you can pay to download. Either way, the codecs are going to be leaked eventually, so I guess the solution for most people will be the familar Linux "user run codec install script" that fetches the codecs from some random server so the distro isn't responsible. Commercial media players based on Pi hardware will have to pay for the licenses.
I could find a dozen GPUs that put the iPhone 4S to shame and are cheaper
You are missing the point. Can you find a dozen that are part of a fully functional computer that costs $25?
Forget teaching kids how to program; the $25 Raspberry Pi computer might just be the home entertainment STB and compact gaming console we’ve been waiting for. The low-cost computer – and its $35 sibling – should deliver double the graphical performance of the iPhone 4S, according to executive director (and Broadcom SoC architect) Eben Upton, telling Digital Foundry that not only does the BCM2835 GPU at the heart of the Raspberry Pi roast Apple’s latest smartphone, but it thoroughly whups NVIDIA’s Tegra 2.
List of Linux adopters. It has some interesting ones which I hadn't heard of, e.g. 180,000 Ubuntu desktops deployed in Macedonian schools.
Apple tries to occupy a very different market.
Apple would love to occupy the corporate and public sector desktop market. It would mean vast amounts of guaranteed income every year.
Linux has been pushed as the 'ideal' public service desktop for years and years and years.
Really? I see the opposite - most Linux vendors have pretty much ignored the desktop and focused on niche areas like embedded systems, servers, HPC, etc. IBM said chasing Windows on the desktop was a deadend, and Red Hat famously pulled away from focusing on the desktop years ago. Ubuntu seems to have been the only one that has maintained a desktop focus, and they have an estimated 13 million or so users.
Judging from all my acquaintances
Anecdotal evidence and a biased sample - your colleagues are probably in the top 1% of global income, and the kind of people who don't mind spending large amounts of cash on their personal computers.
How many *new* netbooks running Linux have you seen for sale in the last 2 years?
The netbook market fell for various reasons. The market changed - people adopted tablets, and full-featured laptops became smaller, faster, and cheaper than they were. MS began selling XP again and put pressure on netbook manufacturers to adopt it. Netbooks also, oddly, became more expensive as they became more like laptops in response to the increased hardware requirements. The choice of Linux distros was often odd as well - instead of partnering with, say, Ubuntu, many of the netbook makers chose to pre-install random Chinese distributions. The rise of smart phones also played a huge part - why carry a larger netbook around with you, when you can do email, facebook, web browsing etc. sufficiently well from your phone, that fits in your pocket and weighs a hundred grams?
Yeah, it's an interesting idea. If it works well, it means people are going to be using the mouse less - instead of click to open a menu, then move to open submenu, and repeating until you get to the action you want - you are just going to be hitting some keyboard hot key and typing "edge fil" and then selecting from the drop down options. It might even be useful for accessibility. OTOH, it is not what people are used to, and there are going to be people complaining. But it is only a default desktop, and people should remember that there are plenty of other desktop options for Ubuntu, and distributions like Kubuntu and Xubuntu make installing them a breeze. I'm a bit bored of the repeated rants against Unity on Slashdot - if you want Ubuntu with a traditional w95 style desktop, then just install Xubuntu. Job done. Multiple desktops is one of the strengths of Linux, not a weakness - does a teenage tablet user really want the same desktop as a seasoned systems programmer? Probably not. Different people, different desktops.
(I don't use Unity, but here's an interesting thing... I was at a friend's place recently, and he said "Hey have you seen this great new Ubuntu?" I was like "You mean the new Unity desktop?" and he said "I don't know, but look at this ..." and proceeded to show me some of the features, and turns out he *loves* Unity - the visual effects, in particular, the left-side app bar, with app icons that glow or something to notify you of events like new emails that require attention etc. Canonical must be doing something right, for some people.)
The Linux desktop went nowhere. 40K desktops in Spain, 14K in Munich and 90K by the French police are by themselves respectable numbers.
By that logic, the Apple desktop also "went nowhere", since there were no mass migrations of government departments to Apple computers. Or maybe there is another explanation? Maybe governments are very conservative in their IT procurement, and by default choose Microsoft, often without even bothering to consider other options? For obvious reasons, it is difficult to estimate the exact number of Linux desktop users, but according to Microsoft, Linux has a greater desktop share than the Mac. Here's are some interesting comments from a report from 2010: Debunking the 1% Myth
If we do the math we find that due to netbooks alone Linux captured nearly 6% of the desktop market in 2009. In order to reach a total number we need to add larger laptops and desktops both from companies like Dell, HP (their business line) as well as smaller boutique vendors.
Additional confirmation of the growth in Linux desktop market share last year came from an unlikely source: Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer. Using a slide to visualize OS market share Ballmer had Linux desktop market share as a slightly larger slice of the pie than MacOS. Nobody considers Apple insignificant on the desktop and neither is Linux. Here is, in part, what Mr. Ballmer had to say about Linux on the desktop and the competition for Windows:
Linux, you could see on the slide, and Apple has certainly increased its share somewhat.
[...]
I think depending on how you look at it, Apple has probably increased its market share over the last year or so by a point or more. And a point of market share on a number that's about 300 million is interesting. It's an interesting amount of market share, while not necessarily being as dramatic as people would think, but we're very focused in on both Apple as a competitor, and Linux as a competitor."
Does anyone believe that Microsoft would see Linux as a serious competitor is Linux had captured just 1% of the market? That doesn't seem very likely, does it? All the figures I have quoted so far represent sales of systems preloaded with a given operating system: Windows, MacOS or Linux. They do not represent actual usage. If you go down to the local brick and mortar computer shop or big box retailer, buy a system with Windows, wipe the hard drive and install Linux that still counts as a Windows system, not a Linux system.
It's been nine years and more money than budgeted and they've converted 65% of the computers.
On the bright side: they have migrated 100% of systems to Firefox, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, and ODF.
more money than budgeted
Yes, but this would almost certainly have also been the case if they were migrating all their systems to a more recent release of Windows. They were running enterprise wide NT4. The comparison point should not be against the pre-existing TCO, but against the alternative cost of migrating to a more recent Windows. "We do not have a goal to compare total cost of ownership. Microsoft stopped supporting NT 4.0, so we must migrate." limux project leader. How much do you think a government migration of 15,000 NT4 desktops, plus Office and other software to a recent release of Windows would cost? Due to increased hardware requirements of new Windows, such a migration would also certainly require new PCs, which would further increase costs. Maybe the cost of migration would be the same, less, or more, but in the long term freeing themselves of costly vendor lock-in and the Microsoft upgrade treadmill should result in substantial cost savings
"Flip flopping" just means changing your mind, right? Changing your mind should only be viewed negatively when it is done with dishonest intent - to deceive and manipulate others, or to act against one's own core beliefs. We live in a complicated world, and there are genuine, complex issues that educated adults can disagree on. The ability to comprehend and reason from multiple points of view, and modify your own position accordingly, ought to be seen as a strength rather than a weakness.
"When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Ron Paul has been groped, due to a metal brace from an old war injury. He says, "I HATE it, but what choice do I have?"
Am I the only person who doesn't care about getting a pat down? It takes like 10 seconds, and then you are waved through security. As opposed to a wand, where it takes longer, and if it beeps and there is a problem touching you, you get taken to a private room. When I've had the choice between wand or pat down, I've always chosen pat down. And when I've experienced it or seen it, it's always been same-sex, so it's about the most unsexual experience you can imagine.
I can understand getting pissed if you're a black guy living in an inner city who gets a pat down every other day in a police "stop and search" procedure, but most people fly very infrequently, certainly not enough to get worked up over. I really don't get it. I guess I just don't freak out very much when people touch me.
"don't fly. You can drive, take a train, or walk."
Actually, I would've thought this would be the libertarian answer. Or fly privately (TSA doesn't screen at private airports, right?).
Like many things, medical regulations are often designed to protect the people who are unable, for whatever reason, to take care of themselves. Someone like yourself is probably responsible enough and qualified enough to handle your own medication and measurement of the side effects. However, for every responsible and educated person like yourself, there will be several people who aren't responsibile and educated enough to self-medicate. There are also many people who, in the absense of a prescription system, would accept drug advertising as fact, and proceed to self-diagnose, and then buy and apply inappropriate medications. I would like to see a system where people like yourself can opt-out and self-medicate to a large degree, but the system also needs to recognise that the majority of peole are not educated well enough to be given uncontrolled access to the contents of a modern pharmacy, and that we don't want a return to the era of unqualified quack-doctor-advertisements telling patients that random drug X will "help" cure their cancer.
(Incidentally, I came across this interesting blog post recently : A blog in support of stupid people’s rights. The list of "stupid" people probably includes a large number of the population at some time in their lives).
You link to an article that explains that in one particular region of the Sahara the localised effects of climate change may have caused more rain, and hence desert greening. This does not mean that the same thing will occur everywhere in the world. In fact, desertification is increasing. Consider some other recent evidence:
climate change is making desertification "the greatest environmental challenge of our times"
Australia suffers worst drought in 1,000 years
THE GREAT DROUGHT OF 2011 Is America's Worst Since The Dust Bowl
Africa drought pushes Kenya and Somalia into pre-famine conditions
Predicting the world's overall changes in food production in response to elevated CO2 is virtually impossible. Global production is expected to rise until the increase in local average temperatures exceeds 3C, but then start to fall. In tropical and dry regions increases of just 1 to 2C are expected to lead to falls in production. In marginal lands where water is the greatest constraint, which includes much of the developing world but also regions such as the western US, the losses may greatly exceed the gains. Climate myths: Higher CO2 levels will boost plant growth and food production
you might as well argue that a woman shouldn't be allowed to marry a man with a small penis like you
You are the one who supports the right of the government to enforce such arbitrary rules on marriage. I am the one who thinks that a woman should be free to do whatever she wants as long as it doesn't harm another person. Which one of those is the absurd position? (hint: it's the one where the government gets to define marriage, and therefore has the power to take away your freedom and ban interracial marriage, homosexual marriage etc.)
Exactly. If someone wants to, say, marry the Berlin Wall then do you really want your tax money used to try and stop her? Why do you care? As long as the relationship isn't abusive and nobody is being harmed, then why would you ever care that someone may choose to marry their pillow? Or a dog? Or even the man who married himself? Or a videogame character? Why do people care? Haven't governments got more important things to spend their tax payers money on, instead of wasting time and money regulating what is basically a social contract?