Excellent point. Its funny how anyone who goes against Global Warming is instantly labeled as a perpetrator of "Bad Science", yet a lot of the initial politically funded and motivated research has turned out to be complete garbage.
I tend to believe that if the early research and consensus had been left to the scientists, and politicians like Al Gore had stayed out of it, it wouldn't be a political issue at all by this point.
When politics gets involved in science it ruins both.
I've seen this from both the religious and the ardently atheist. I used to work for a guy who was positive the world was 4000 years old. I explained to him several times how things like superposition work but he just never listened. I also have known several people over the years who were ardently atheist, and would gladly tell religious people how stupid they were, but at the same time believed just pharmaceutical companies are trying to trick them into giving their kids autism through poison vaccines.
It seems to me that the problem is humans are inclined to accept some form of religion, so when most people make the leap to agnostic or atheist they have to find something new, and its usually something moronic like joining PETA.
Every single Democrat and some of the garbage science behind Global Warming. Every single Democrat and every single fact that they deem offensive(Any race/gender based statistic that doesn't show complete equality or blame white people for the problems). Almost every single Democrat and any garbage Science which at the moment is popular (eugenics before WW2, vaccines and autism today).
I'm not saying the republicans are doing the exact same thing, but to pretend that the democrats don't is just silly.
Thats why you use something like comic books. Its not that weird for someone in their 20s or 30s to have a comic book collection with no record of acquisition.
How are you not getting this? Oh, that's right, you're just being contrary because this is slashdot and everyone has to act like a fucking prick the moment anyone doesn't bow to their moronic point.
Yea, that simply isn't true. I don't know where people got this idea. If by the poor you mean immigrants then yes, they do often work harder in that they work with their bodies and are physically tired every night with aching backs, but the jobs that pay the most are not the easiest ones.
You know why a doctor makes more than you? Because you worked hard. If you think your fucking job a barnes and noble is hard work, then guess what: You're a spoiled fucking baby.
I don't think you understand money laundering. Ending up with $450 in cash presents exactly the same problem as the original $500 in cash. Now, if you had a comic book business, or intended to export the comic books elsewhere, or otherwise mean to obtain some other form of payment, that might work. But merely losing $50 in cash makes you a bad criminal as well as a bad businessman.
The idea is that you can get a receipt for the sale of the comic book. The loss is just so you can sell it faster.
Ideally you would want to own a cash business, such as a car wash or a small restaurant, from which you can report your ill gotten gains as profits, but because when you're just starting out you aren't likely to have the money to set up an entire business to clean your funds, cash transactions like this would be a solid starting point.
If you report 30k of income to the IRS and site the sale of comic books they're going to ignore it, or maybe giggle about what a nerd you are. If you don't report any income at all yet you buy a new car and pay rent all year round you're going to be getting a lot of attention (assuming someone notices).
That oversimplification is terrible IMO. At least I hope so anyway, because the people who blame others for their success are... spoiled fucking babies. I was going to wright more, but its about that simple. If you think someone else having more than you because they worked harder is unjust, you're a spoiled fucking baby.
They basically managed to make a so-so statue of someone that can move its eyes and mouth awkwardly? Unless this thing can walk around and crack-wise I'd be way more impressed by, say, a working Johnny 5.
You know, one of the worst effects of the Marijuana prohibition has been that kids now days don't see a clear line between the light drugs and the hard ones. Just because Pot should be legal doesn't mean that Meth should. Its not even in the same universe of drugs.
Marijuana, Shrooms, Extacy(maybe), and a few others should probably be legal, but heroin, crack, meth, cocaine(sorry guys, its not a light drug), and anything else on that level should remain illegal.
You have to be pretty removed from reality to think that Meth should be a legal drug IMO.
Prohibition is necessary in the case of hard drugs. Its true that we need to attack it from all angles, but legalization and taxation of most of the illegal drugs would be a societal disaster the scale of which we have never seen.
What, why? What's wrong with doing (e.g) cocaine, exactly? All sorts of businessmen and entertainers and other powerful people do it on a regular basis, without significant side-effects; because it's illegal, you only hear about the people who crash and burn because of it, not the people who keep it in check.
I mean, seriously, we can get a good idea of how much cocaine is being used, even if (because it's illegal, obvs) we can't track actual rates. The NDIC claims that there's roughly 300 metric tons of cocaine available in the USA annually - and you can bet that a significant portion of that gets used. If cocaine is so dangerous, and people are using so much of it, where are all the cocaine addicts who burn out and need to be treated? Sure, there are some, but not significantly more than any other legal drug like alcohol or tobacco.
Our current "hard drug" policy is like basing alcohol policy on surveys of Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and temperance groups. What we need are reality-based policies, not these bullshit wish-based policies we have right now.
Whats wrong with doing cocaine? See Charlie Sheen please.
Assuming the facts are presented correctly, what this guy was doing is simple old fashioned money laundering. He was buying something with drug money so he could later sell it and have clean money. Comic books are actually a smart way to do this, its unlikely that anyone would suspect it.
Here's an example of how it may have worked: 1. Dude sells $500 of meth. 2. Dude takes the $500 cash to a comic book convention. 3. Dude buys a comic book for ~$500 4. Dude sells the same comic book for $450 in clean, crisp, legal bills 5. Repeat 1-4 6. Profit! 7.? 8. Prison!
Just because the laws on Marijuana are poorly thought out, ineffective, and unnecessary doesn't mean that all drug laws are.
Prohibition is necessary in the case of hard drugs. Its true that we need to attack it from all angles, but legalization and taxation of most of the illegal drugs would be a societal disaster the scale of which we have never seen.
Of course this is a monetary loss, something worth half a billion dollars was destroyed. The half billion was spent to create something of value, had it been spent on something else that was not lost, we would have spent the money and had something of value to show for it.
The thing of value was the knowledge we would have gained from the satellite. The post above you was dead on correct.
Slashdot Mirror
Excellent point. Its funny how anyone who goes against Global Warming is instantly labeled as a perpetrator of "Bad Science", yet a lot of the initial politically funded and motivated research has turned out to be complete garbage.
I tend to believe that if the early research and consensus had been left to the scientists, and politicians like Al Gore had stayed out of it, it wouldn't be a political issue at all by this point.
When politics gets involved in science it ruins both.
Its just like rock music and religion.
I've seen this from both the religious and the ardently atheist. I used to work for a guy who was positive the world was 4000 years old. I explained to him several times how things like superposition work but he just never listened. I also have known several people over the years who were ardently atheist, and would gladly tell religious people how stupid they were, but at the same time believed just pharmaceutical companies are trying to trick them into giving their kids autism through poison vaccines.
It seems to me that the problem is humans are inclined to accept some form of religion, so when most people make the leap to agnostic or atheist they have to find something new, and its usually something moronic like joining PETA.
Why the hell does this article quote a literature professor on the topic of the quality of scientific research? How the fuck would he know?
Every single Democrat and some of the garbage science behind Global Warming. Every single Democrat and every single fact that they deem offensive(Any race/gender based statistic that doesn't show complete equality or blame white people for the problems). Almost every single Democrat and any garbage Science which at the moment is popular (eugenics before WW2, vaccines and autism today).
I'm not saying the republicans are doing the exact same thing, but to pretend that the democrats don't is just silly.
Thats why you use something like comic books. Its not that weird for someone in their 20s or 30s to have a comic book collection with no record of acquisition.
How are you not getting this? Oh, that's right, you're just being contrary because this is slashdot and everyone has to act like a fucking prick the moment anyone doesn't bow to their moronic point.
Yea, that simply isn't true. I don't know where people got this idea. If by the poor you mean immigrants then yes, they do often work harder in that they work with their bodies and are physically tired every night with aching backs, but the jobs that pay the most are not the easiest ones.
You know why a doctor makes more than you? Because you worked hard. If you think your fucking job a barnes and noble is hard work, then guess what: You're a spoiled fucking baby.
I don't think you understand money laundering. Ending up with $450 in cash presents exactly the same problem as the original $500 in cash. Now, if you had a comic book business, or intended to export the comic books elsewhere, or otherwise mean to obtain some other form of payment, that might work. But merely losing $50 in cash makes you a bad criminal as well as a bad businessman.
The idea is that you can get a receipt for the sale of the comic book. The loss is just so you can sell it faster.
Ideally you would want to own a cash business, such as a car wash or a small restaurant, from which you can report your ill gotten gains as profits, but because when you're just starting out you aren't likely to have the money to set up an entire business to clean your funds, cash transactions like this would be a solid starting point.
If you report 30k of income to the IRS and site the sale of comic books they're going to ignore it, or maybe giggle about what a nerd you are. If you don't report any income at all yet you buy a new car and pay rent all year round you're going to be getting a lot of attention (assuming someone notices).
That oversimplification is terrible IMO. At least I hope so anyway, because the people who blame others for their success are... spoiled fucking babies. I was going to wright more, but its about that simple. If you think someone else having more than you because they worked harder is unjust, you're a spoiled fucking baby.
Really? Trickle down proven wrong over and over? Source on that?
Oh, that's right, there are way too many externalities for us to have any idea what actually happens.
It would just be masturbation, which is perfectly natural.
Ok, perhaps we can reach a gay agreement? Something in a 69 or reach-around? ... I think I'm doing this wrong.
They basically managed to make a so-so statue of someone that can move its eyes and mouth awkwardly? Unless this thing can walk around and crack-wise I'd be way more impressed by, say, a working Johnny 5.
You know, one of the worst effects of the Marijuana prohibition has been that kids now days don't see a clear line between the light drugs and the hard ones. Just because Pot should be legal doesn't mean that Meth should. Its not even in the same universe of drugs.
Marijuana, Shrooms, Extacy(maybe), and a few others should probably be legal, but heroin, crack, meth, cocaine(sorry guys, its not a light drug), and anything else on that level should remain illegal.
You have to be pretty removed from reality to think that Meth should be a legal drug IMO.
Yea, he skipped steps 4-7. I never said he was good at it.
My bet is he was going to ultimately sell these though. He was probably sitting on them so it looked legit when he reported the income.
I'm not saying he didn't love comic books, but that would be a fantastic way to launder money.
What, why? What's wrong with doing (e.g) cocaine, exactly? All sorts of businessmen and entertainers and other powerful people do it on a regular basis, without significant side-effects; because it's illegal, you only hear about the people who crash and burn because of it, not the people who keep it in check.
I mean, seriously, we can get a good idea of how much cocaine is being used, even if (because it's illegal, obvs) we can't track actual rates. The NDIC claims that there's roughly 300 metric tons of cocaine available in the USA annually - and you can bet that a significant portion of that gets used. If cocaine is so dangerous, and people are using so much of it, where are all the cocaine addicts who burn out and need to be treated? Sure, there are some, but not significantly more than any other legal drug like alcohol or tobacco.
Our current "hard drug" policy is like basing alcohol policy on surveys of Alcoholics Anonymous meetings and temperance groups. What we need are reality-based policies, not these bullshit wish-based policies we have right now.
Whats wrong with doing cocaine? See Charlie Sheen please.
Alcohol and tobacco are legalised and taxed. If neither of them are hard drugs, I don't know what is.
...
Then you're a fucking moron.
So... still you?
Assuming the facts are presented correctly, what this guy was doing is simple old fashioned money laundering. He was buying something with drug money so he could later sell it and have clean money. Comic books are actually a smart way to do this, its unlikely that anyone would suspect it.
Here's an example of how it may have worked:
1. Dude sells $500 of meth.
2. Dude takes the $500 cash to a comic book convention.
3. Dude buys a comic book for ~$500
4. Dude sells the same comic book for $450 in clean, crisp, legal bills
5. Repeat 1-4
6. Profit!
7.?
8. Prison!
Just because the laws on Marijuana are poorly thought out, ineffective, and unnecessary doesn't mean that all drug laws are.
Prohibition is necessary in the case of hard drugs. Its true that we need to attack it from all angles, but legalization and taxation of most of the illegal drugs would be a societal disaster the scale of which we have never seen.
Smug anti-death penalty people should be imprisoned for life at massive taxpayer expense.
I think we can all thank the teachers union for keeping horrible teachers like that in the classroom.
Uhh... Did you read the article? At the very least its the second.
Of course this is a monetary loss, something worth half a billion dollars was destroyed. The half billion was spent to create something of value, had it been spent on something else that was not lost, we would have spent the money and had something of value to show for it.
The thing of value was the knowledge we would have gained from the satellite. The post above you was dead on correct.
And they're about to lay of a lot of other peoples dads. Bad news here.
They had to come from somewhere right?