Not having to manage licensing... is a gift all its own. I'm not talking about not buying licenses, I mean not having to deal with ANY of that shit for servers... a blessing.
Many people will be born, have kids, and die in one region and culture. Only recently in human existence have some people been afforded such easy movement. 500 years ago, it would have been basically unthinkable that you could leave your family and go start a life on the antipode of your birth location in exchange for maybe a few months wages. Most of humanity had to work just to survive... agrarian society wasn't THAT long ago even in developed nations. Cultural mores are real and, especially when it came to who gets your daughter, VERY long lasting traditions and rules.
You are viewing this discussion through the lens of your own modern reality. That is dumb, not insightful.
I would think for a pool of candidates of varying temperaments due to natural variations, some temperaments would would be more likely to pass on their DNA depending on various external factors like climate, terrain, and yes - society.
The military has started thinking about societies as "human terrain" precisely because it IS just another factor of environment. It is as real as the physical ground, vegetation, and weather.
The more I think about it and read about it, I see no reason why culture would NOT influence who gets to mate with who. Different cultures value different attributes, and those distinctions regularly decide who you let marry your daughter, who you let your son date, or who a person finds attractive in a mate.
It is highly unlikely that as society we select for aggressiveness or business acumen
Selecting an aggressive mate may WELL have been the difference between life and death in some cultures. And indeed MANY cultures teach their children to hold overly-driven, businessmen/doctors/lawyers/athletes in high esteem.
what is globally accepted in animal breeding, that certain behavioral tendencies accompany accompany genetics right along with certain physical characteristics, is the worst taboo to apply to people.
which is ridiculous. populations living in specific social environments will SELECT FOR and AGAINST various physical and behavioral traits... and those traits which are successful in a specific society will then go on to build the society that those traits are best adapted to. like a feedback loop.
I'm talking about cases where internet access is available through the inflight wifi. Taking control of the network equipment through which this traffic runs isn't harmless.
The point of the article is that 138,469 wished they lived in a kingdom with a benevolent dictator who can simply make people do stuff because they want it.
If there's one thing Obama is passionate about, it is expanding federal power to all aspects of everything. Why not cut out the middle man and create a petition that asks the White House to assume authority over all levels and government branches? That's essentially what you are asking for.
UFC was more interesting before the weight classes and rounds. The old Gracie way, it was over when it was over. The modern implementation before you today was scientifically formulated to maximize PPV revenue from people who want to see flying elbows instead of crafty omoplatas.
When someone attacks you, you are reacting to something that is already happening. So of course, without any experience one might revert to panicked pointing and shooting. But with experience and training, you can become fast, accurate, and mindful of the elements like [ firepower, terrain, time, strengths, weaknesses, and leverage ] which MAY help you overcome a time and/or luck deficit. Panic doesn't have to be a forgone conclusion.
USPSA, and even more so, IDPA competition can help you prepare for some of these aspects. Quick and panicked is that guy I was talking about, no formal experience, at best just shooting garbage out in the desert, at worst just bought a gun and tried it once at an indoor range. Practical shooting isn't about pinpoint accuracy, it is about balancing speed, accuracy, and power to achieve the most damage in the least amount of time. And going to local matches on a regular basis provides the repetition necessary for a conditioned-response-style drilled training (read On Killing, Col. Grossman).
I never said girls couldn't. I said that on paper they should be able to just fine, but that out in the real world it just doesn't happen.
As far as wasting their lives, I disagree. A USPSA C-classified female shooter is likely to come out on top in a gun fight against the average guy who is has only informal experience shooting junk in the desert.
Maybe they won't be a champion, but 94.9% of all USPSA shooters won't achieve what Jessie Duff has achieved in GM status.
A couple months ago a 12-ish year old girl beat me in all 6 stages of a local match.... but... uhh... i had magazine problems!
hence my original post.... that females on paper should be able to compete just fine with males and there's no reason to hand out separate awards.
females do compete on equal terms, but their scores are compared only to other females for awards. you are blaming the symptom for causing the disease.
ahh, the "certain amazonian society" argument whereby someone seeks to argue against the prevalent facts by citing some small exceptions.
of course there will be a few exceptionally talented black swans that show up from time to time. these are exceptions to the rule.
for the year-after-year slog of shooters making their way to various competitions up to the top... WPW's, Camp Perry, USPSA nationals, IPSC championships, and all the hundreds of others, including the olympics, the males statistically dominate the top.
as far as I know, none of the scores are scaled differently for male vs female. the courses-of-fire are generally the same. the scores can be compared apples-to-apples, but we just hand out more trophies. females don't do worse BECAUSE of the separation, that is ridiculous.
i see this debate in shooting sports going the other way.
there really aren't any good reasons why a female should be a worse marksman or shooting competitor than a male. in fact, small efficient muscles and better color eyesight make females more ideal than males.
so a lot of people think that there should be no gender seperation in shooting sport competitions, and I tend to agree. but for some reason, the top females can never quite break into the top levels with the top males. just last year, Jessie Duff became the first female USPSA grand master-level shooter. on paper, there's no reason why they can't be as competitive as the guys, but in reality it just hasn't happened. so we end up with segregated competitions (in most cases. there ARE plenty of gender-immeterial competitions out there) to keep it "fair".
disclaimer: i will never be able to compete against the competitive girls.
redneck... how is it acceptable to use that geo-discriminatory slur?
you think you are so much better than someone because you grew up in a suburb or something?
the sheriff is elected. unlike most police chiefs, state police commissioners, or the heads of the FBI, DEA, BATFE, or the hundred other federal agencies that somehow have arrest powers and guns. think about that for a second. That is a LOT of people who can ruin your life who don't answer to anyone you will EVER have any control over. I bet the sheriff can't invent constitution-free zones like the CBP.
I say get all that hardware into small town hands where it will fall into disrepair, rusting in weed-covered motor pools in a few years when a fleet of MaxxPros that ride like SHIT is last year's Christmas present.
city and m/100k detroit 54.58 baltimore 35.01 philadelphia 21.50 memphis 20.23 chicago 18.48
subtracting the population and murders from the US, and the US moves to around 4.1. removing DC and we move to 4.09. cities containing 2% of the US population account for 11% of the murders.
if you are operating a vehicle on private property, you don't need a permission slip.
licensed jobs.. people. doctors, engineers. We could have a great argument here on/. about barriers to entry, but licenses for those positions have nothing to do with a license for a person to own a piece of property. engineers and electricians are licensed though boards, usually at the state level, and the standards are set by others in that profession. it isn't a permission slip to own a device.
your car analogy was closest. the people analogy, other than the word "license", has nothing to do with this topic.
and then you resort to this stupid meme, so as to belittle me for my position.
your position boils down to "everything should be under the state. and i should decide what people can have." like a little bitch.
Slashdot Mirror
Not having to manage licensing... is a gift all its own. I'm not talking about not buying licenses, I mean not having to deal with ANY of that shit for servers... a blessing.
Many people will be born, have kids, and die in one region and culture. Only recently in human existence have some people been afforded such easy movement. 500 years ago, it would have been basically unthinkable that you could leave your family and go start a life on the antipode of your birth location in exchange for maybe a few months wages. Most of humanity had to work just to survive... agrarian society wasn't THAT long ago even in developed nations. Cultural mores are real and, especially when it came to who gets your daughter, VERY long lasting traditions and rules.
You are viewing this discussion through the lens of your own modern reality. That is dumb, not insightful.
I would think for a pool of candidates of varying temperaments due to natural variations, some temperaments would would be more likely to pass on their DNA depending on various external factors like climate, terrain, and yes - society.
The military has started thinking about societies as "human terrain" precisely because it IS just another factor of environment. It is as real as the physical ground, vegetation, and weather.
The more I think about it and read about it, I see no reason why culture would NOT influence who gets to mate with who. Different cultures value different attributes, and those distinctions regularly decide who you let marry your daughter, who you let your son date, or who a person finds attractive in a mate.
It is highly unlikely that as society we select for aggressiveness or business acumen
Selecting an aggressive mate may WELL have been the difference between life and death in some cultures. And indeed MANY cultures teach their children to hold overly-driven, businessmen/doctors/lawyers/athletes in high esteem.
You have pointed out the only really good explanation I've read on this. So thank you for that.
Timescale. Great point. I hope someone mods you up.
what is globally accepted in animal breeding, that certain behavioral tendencies accompany accompany genetics right along with certain physical characteristics, is the worst taboo to apply to people.
which is ridiculous. populations living in specific social environments will SELECT FOR and AGAINST various physical and behavioral traits... and those traits which are successful in a specific society will then go on to build the society that those traits are best adapted to. like a feedback loop.
is there something totally crazy here?
I'm talking about cases where internet access is available through the inflight wifi.
Taking control of the network equipment through which this traffic runs isn't harmless.
the whole point of in-flight WIFI is that people can be charged exorbitant sums for painfully-slow internet access while in flight.
While certainly it is no hijacking of a plane, the hijacking of this network equipment isn't nothing.
ahh... so just all the passenger data can be hijacked.
nothing to worry about here.
... but only by using Python.
"what price can we put on avoiding extinction"
sounds like someone's got a great idea for a kickstarter campaign!
The point of the article is that 138,469 wished they lived in a kingdom with a benevolent dictator who can simply make people do stuff because they want it.
...except HE gets to tell you that. Because Master Blaster runs Bartertown.
Like Stalin... Here to administer the equality, not to participate in it.
If there's one thing Obama is passionate about, it is expanding federal power to all aspects of everything.
Why not cut out the middle man and create a petition that asks the White House to assume authority over all levels and government branches? That's essentially what you are asking for.
if your president decides who sells what, where, when, and how... you aren't free.
ditto if your governor, state legislature, or city council is doing it.
this entire thing is bullshit. it isn't up to any of them, for or against.
UFC was more interesting before the weight classes and rounds. The old Gracie way, it was over when it was over.
The modern implementation before you today was scientifically formulated to maximize PPV revenue from people who want to see flying elbows instead of crafty omoplatas.
When someone attacks you, you are reacting to something that is already happening. So of course, without any experience one might revert to panicked pointing and shooting. But with experience and training, you can become fast, accurate, and mindful of the elements like [ firepower, terrain, time, strengths, weaknesses, and leverage ] which MAY help you overcome a time and/or luck deficit. Panic doesn't have to be a forgone conclusion.
USPSA, and even more so, IDPA competition can help you prepare for some of these aspects. Quick and panicked is that guy I was talking about, no formal experience, at best just shooting garbage out in the desert, at worst just bought a gun and tried it once at an indoor range. Practical shooting isn't about pinpoint accuracy, it is about balancing speed, accuracy, and power to achieve the most damage in the least amount of time. And going to local matches on a regular basis provides the repetition necessary for a conditioned-response-style drilled training (read On Killing, Col. Grossman).
Watch some videos of people like Jerry Miculek.
I never said girls couldn't. I said that on paper they should be able to just fine, but that out in the real world it just doesn't happen.
As far as wasting their lives, I disagree. A USPSA C-classified female shooter is likely to come out on top in a gun fight against the average guy who is has only informal experience shooting junk in the desert.
Maybe they won't be a champion, but 94.9% of all USPSA shooters won't achieve what Jessie Duff has achieved in GM status.
A couple months ago a 12-ish year old girl beat me in all 6 stages of a local match.... but... uhh... i had magazine problems!
hence my original post.... that females on paper should be able to compete just fine with males and there's no reason to hand out separate awards.
females do compete on equal terms, but their scores are compared only to other females for awards. you are blaming the symptom for causing the disease.
ahh, the "certain amazonian society" argument whereby someone seeks to argue against the prevalent facts by citing some small exceptions.
of course there will be a few exceptionally talented black swans that show up from time to time. these are exceptions to the rule.
for the year-after-year slog of shooters making their way to various competitions up to the top... WPW's, Camp Perry, USPSA nationals, IPSC championships, and all the hundreds of others, including the olympics, the males statistically dominate the top.
as far as I know, none of the scores are scaled differently for male vs female. the courses-of-fire are generally the same. the scores can be compared apples-to-apples, but we just hand out more trophies. females don't do worse BECAUSE of the separation, that is ridiculous.
i see this debate in shooting sports going the other way.
there really aren't any good reasons why a female should be a worse marksman or shooting competitor than a male. in fact, small efficient muscles and better color eyesight make females more ideal than males.
so a lot of people think that there should be no gender seperation in shooting sport competitions, and I tend to agree. but for some reason, the top females can never quite break into the top levels with the top males. just last year, Jessie Duff became the first female USPSA grand master-level shooter. on paper, there's no reason why they can't be as competitive as the guys, but in reality it just hasn't happened. so we end up with segregated competitions (in most cases. there ARE plenty of gender-immeterial competitions out there) to keep it "fair".
disclaimer: i will never be able to compete against the competitive girls.
and anthropogenic co2 production is several magnitudes lower than natural sources.
uh oh.
redneck...
how is it acceptable to use that geo-discriminatory slur?
you think you are so much better than someone because you grew up in a suburb or something?
the sheriff is elected. unlike most police chiefs, state police commissioners, or the heads of the FBI, DEA, BATFE, or the hundred other federal agencies that somehow have arrest powers and guns. think about that for a second. That is a LOT of people who can ruin your life who don't answer to anyone you will EVER have any control over. I bet the sheriff can't invent constitution-free zones like the CBP.
I say get all that hardware into small town hands where it will fall into disrepair, rusting in weed-covered motor pools in a few years when a fleet of MaxxPros that ride like SHIT is last year's Christmas present.
it is actually a bit a stretch.
1st thing, the US is actually not that bad. with 4.8 murders per 100k people, we are no-where near the bad part of town.
on the other hand, here are the top 5, from data in this 2012 report.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cj...
city and m/100k
detroit 54.58
baltimore 35.01
philadelphia 21.50
memphis 20.23
chicago 18.48
subtracting the population and murders from the US, and the US moves to around 4.1. removing DC and we move to 4.09.
cities containing 2% of the US population account for 11% of the murders.
if you are operating a vehicle on private property, you don't need a permission slip.
licensed jobs.. people. doctors, engineers. We could have a great argument here on /. about barriers to entry, but licenses for those positions have nothing to do with a license for a person to own a piece of property. engineers and electricians are licensed though boards, usually at the state level, and the standards are set by others in that profession. it isn't a permission slip to own a device.
your car analogy was closest. the people analogy, other than the word "license", has nothing to do with this topic.
and then you resort to this stupid meme, so as to belittle me for my position.
your position boils down to "everything should be under the state. and i should decide what people can have." like a little bitch.
So guns are decreasingly used for robberies.
That wasn't the point you were trying to make, was it? Because I just counter-cherry-picked you.