Repeal and replace in one bill then. A gap in regulation shouldn't be allowed because it could be an attempt to use the "grinch tactic" to achieve deregulation.
Yep, that's why the people against displaying them in public want them put into a museum and only shown in the proper educational context, so that we will forgeOH WAIT...
In FreeBSD's Fortune database (a database of quotes that are randomly shown in some areas of the UI for entertainment purposes, such as on login for example), there were quotes from Adolf Hitler (and some of the ones linked in TFS were incredibly sexist). They were finally removed even though there was a code commit to do it 12 years ago that was rolled back. The alt-right was angered by this. The quotes were moved into an extension of the Fortune database where offensive material is contained.
Before going directly for the last-resort option, maybe try to keep that no-good Verizon goon from rolling back net neutrality? I think the mother of all protests is in order. Think SOPA blackout protest times a hundred. Give that a try and see how it goes.
You could launch balloons in two different places: Pick one place at random, and then pick your second location near the "edge" that was visible in the video from the first launch. You'll see that suddenly there's a new "edge" beyond what you saw before and close to your first launch site, which would not be possible if the earth were a disc, but would make sense if it was roughly spherical. Repeat until you circle the planet if you like.
Would any climate conspiracy theorists like a rocket? For taking atmospheric temperature measurements maybe? How about anti-vaxxers, maybe you could see the Illuminati space station where they make autism juice or something? Rockets shouldn't be just for flat-earthers! >:D
I don't know how they got so enamored with nature in the first place. Nature is evil, good is unnatural. Nature is a pack of hyenas eating a baby elephant alive, or an elephant seal raping a penguin in two. In more human terms, it's the bloodsoaked and justice-free nasty, brutish and short tribal existence we've been trying to move away from throughout recorded history. We are, naturally, a species of horrifying monsters raring to unleash pure unbridled animal savagery on anyone outside our monkeysphere for personal gain. Overgrown balding chimpanzees just smart enough to be vastly more terrible. Anything that makes us different from that is against nature. That monkeysphere does constitute an important construct, and the tribe would indeed kick libertarian-minded people out to deal with the sabertoothed cats alone. It's only the widespread and relatively unconditional safety of modern societies that have allowed such unhealthy levels of individualism to evolve.
Libertarianism is largely a convenient refuge for people with darker ideologies anyway. It's a system ideal for unleashing chaos and suffering that can be disguised as just having some kind of benign grudge against government - you know, that thing that administers and pays for civilization. If you're a corporatocrat or a white supremacist or just a plain-jane cackling psychopath, it's a convenient and socially acceptable group to hide in while still furthering your political interests.
Whole generations died in grinding poverty before their grandchildren and great-grandchildren got the new jobs. Do you think this is a minor detail you can just gloss over?
I'm not talking about article selection or technical issues, I'm talking about the community. I'm starting to think it may be time to abandon ship and leave Slashdot to the various "deplorables" such as those who agree with James Damore's blatant, foul scientific racism. Before Gamergate, Slashdot didn't seem to have anywhere near such a high proportion of Social Injustice Enthusiasts. I come to this forum for intelligent commentary and debate, not an infinite spew of toxic alt-right anger-vomit, which is mostly all I see on here these days.
Unfortunately it seems to be an unavoidable side-effect of hosting a forum with little to no censorship in today's political climate.
Jack Dorsey said it is unrealistic and impossible to remove suicidal tweets.
I could probably do it with a grep script, but if you have the resources, some machine learning could be helpful too. You could give users a suicide "heat level" based on the output of the grep script and user reports, and focus the attention of the more resource intensive machine-learning algorithm on the "hottest" users.
Now give me a million dollars for this amazing innovation.
You're trying to use "historical context" to say that because some people were judged by the color of their skin to their detriment, they should now be judged by the color of their skin to their benefit, and vice versa, to compensate for the past. Once again, two wrongs do not make a right, and people should never be judged by the color of their skin in a world where we're all equal. Even if you disagree, its absurd to suggest this is a racist attitude.
Good luck with your sociology project. I encourage you to ask a woman's opinion about your thoughts on sexual assault. There's a reason every one will find them reprehensible.
Colorblindness is racism because it ignores historical context. Opposition to it isn't saying everyone isn't equal, it's saying historical context is real and we shouldn't ignore it.
Your attempt to find the source of the achievement gap could be not scientifically racist...but ethically, researching this subject is playing with fire in the middle of a gasoline fight, so don't be surprised when people have a negative reaction to it.
I'm not arguing that women are delicate flowers. I'm arguing that they're normal human beings and not all the hardened action-movie badasses you argue they are.
I'm not interested in word games. From what I understand you're proposing that the government should force private companies to allow a certain range of viewpoints to be expressed on their platforms. If that's what you're proposing, how do the proposed rules differ from the Fairness Doctrine?
BTW, the reason Menendez isn't in the news is that he's on trial and not running for office, and that the accusations are nowhere near as solid as you suggest.
There is a double standard with Roy Moore though. There were similar accusations against Donald Trump and the media didn't care much back then, and doesn't care now. Time to just accept that US politics is cool with alleged pedophiles, I say.
I don't spend my time in/r/TheDonald, but I speak with all too many on the far-right and you're the first to make a peep about it, even when I point out that I haven't heard any complaints. But now that you've expressed your opposition to bringing back the fairness doctrine, what's your plan for barring websites and newspapers from censoring content they don't wish to carry, and does it go both ways? Will liberal articles have to be allowed on Breitbart? Leftist comments in/r/TheDonald?
Decent idea, I'm not sure it would've avoided this problem entirely (there would've still been the problem of selective issuance of lD verification), but that definitely would've been an improvement.
Slashdot Mirror
Repeal and replace in one bill then. A gap in regulation shouldn't be allowed because it could be an attempt to use the "grinch tactic" to achieve deregulation.
Some of the quotes are shown in the Twitter post. They're so sexist, James Damore could identify them as such.
1 knocked down by an angry mob vs. maybe a dozen carefully and professionally relocated? Is cherry picking all you got?
Or, you know, you were to become homeless and possibly starve to death. Your body, your choice!
Yep, that's why the people against displaying them in public want them put into a museum and only shown in the proper educational context, so that we will forgeOH WAIT...
In FreeBSD's Fortune database (a database of quotes that are randomly shown in some areas of the UI for entertainment purposes, such as on login for example), there were quotes from Adolf Hitler (and some of the ones linked in TFS were incredibly sexist). They were finally removed even though there was a code commit to do it 12 years ago that was rolled back. The alt-right was angered by this. The quotes were moved into an extension of the Fortune database where offensive material is contained.
Before going directly for the last-resort option, maybe try to keep that no-good Verizon goon from rolling back net neutrality? I think the mother of all protests is in order. Think SOPA blackout protest times a hundred. Give that a try and see how it goes.
Anyone got marshmallows?
They may taste like pork and stupid when they're done.
You could launch balloons in two different places: Pick one place at random, and then pick your second location near the "edge" that was visible in the video from the first launch. You'll see that suddenly there's a new "edge" beyond what you saw before and close to your first launch site, which would not be possible if the earth were a disc, but would make sense if it was roughly spherical. Repeat until you circle the planet if you like.
Would any climate conspiracy theorists like a rocket? For taking atmospheric temperature measurements maybe? How about anti-vaxxers, maybe you could see the Illuminati space station where they make autism juice or something? Rockets shouldn't be just for flat-earthers! >:D
It's a ghost town, ever heard of "sky burial?"
I don't know how they got so enamored with nature in the first place. Nature is evil, good is unnatural. Nature is a pack of hyenas eating a baby elephant alive, or an elephant seal raping a penguin in two. In more human terms, it's the bloodsoaked and justice-free nasty, brutish and short tribal existence we've been trying to move away from throughout recorded history. We are, naturally, a species of horrifying monsters raring to unleash pure unbridled animal savagery on anyone outside our monkeysphere for personal gain. Overgrown balding chimpanzees just smart enough to be vastly more terrible. Anything that makes us different from that is against nature. That monkeysphere does constitute an important construct, and the tribe would indeed kick libertarian-minded people out to deal with the sabertoothed cats alone. It's only the widespread and relatively unconditional safety of modern societies that have allowed such unhealthy levels of individualism to evolve.
Libertarianism is largely a convenient refuge for people with darker ideologies anyway. It's a system ideal for unleashing chaos and suffering that can be disguised as just having some kind of benign grudge against government - you know, that thing that administers and pays for civilization. If you're a corporatocrat or a white supremacist or just a plain-jane cackling psychopath, it's a convenient and socially acceptable group to hide in while still furthering your political interests.
Whole generations died in grinding poverty before their grandchildren and great-grandchildren got the new jobs. Do you think this is a minor detail you can just gloss over?
I'm not talking about article selection or technical issues, I'm talking about the community. I'm starting to think it may be time to abandon ship and leave Slashdot to the various "deplorables" such as those who agree with James Damore's blatant, foul scientific racism. Before Gamergate, Slashdot didn't seem to have anywhere near such a high proportion of Social Injustice Enthusiasts. I come to this forum for intelligent commentary and debate, not an infinite spew of toxic alt-right anger-vomit, which is mostly all I see on here these days.
Unfortunately it seems to be an unavoidable side-effect of hosting a forum with little to no censorship in today's political climate.
Jack Dorsey said it is unrealistic and impossible to remove suicidal tweets.
I could probably do it with a grep script, but if you have the resources, some machine learning could be helpful too. You could give users a suicide "heat level" based on the output of the grep script and user reports, and focus the attention of the more resource intensive machine-learning algorithm on the "hottest" users.
Now give me a million dollars for this amazing innovation.
You're trying to use "historical context" to say that because some people were judged by the color of their skin to their detriment, they should now be judged by the color of their skin to their benefit, and vice versa, to compensate for the past. Once again, two wrongs do not make a right, and people should never be judged by the color of their skin in a world where we're all equal. Even if you disagree, its absurd to suggest this is a racist attitude.
Hardly. Give this a read:
https://www.psychologytoday.co...
Good luck with your sociology project. I encourage you to ask a woman's opinion about your thoughts on sexual assault. There's a reason every one will find them reprehensible.
STOP! It's fact-check time!
https://www.snopes.com/trumps-...
https://www.snopes.com/donald-...
Interesting. It's the Chinese left's equivalent of "cuckservative:"
http://www.sixthtone.com/news/...
Colorblindness is racism because it ignores historical context. Opposition to it isn't saying everyone isn't equal, it's saying historical context is real and we shouldn't ignore it.
Your attempt to find the source of the achievement gap could be not scientifically racist...but ethically, researching this subject is playing with fire in the middle of a gasoline fight, so don't be surprised when people have a negative reaction to it.
I'm not arguing that women are delicate flowers. I'm arguing that they're normal human beings and not all the hardened action-movie badasses you argue they are.
I'm not interested in word games. From what I understand you're proposing that the government should force private companies to allow a certain range of viewpoints to be expressed on their platforms. If that's what you're proposing, how do the proposed rules differ from the Fairness Doctrine?
OK, so how does this differ from the Fairness Doctrine?
BTW, the reason Menendez isn't in the news is that he's on trial and not running for office, and that the accusations are nowhere near as solid as you suggest.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new...
There is a double standard with Roy Moore though. There were similar accusations against Donald Trump and the media didn't care much back then, and doesn't care now. Time to just accept that US politics is cool with alleged pedophiles, I say.
Twitter was selective in who it would issue these check marks to, regardless of a user's will or ability to meet the criteria:
https://slashdot.org/comments....
I don't spend my time in /r/TheDonald, but I speak with all too many on the far-right and you're the first to make a peep about it, even when I point out that I haven't heard any complaints. But now that you've expressed your opposition to bringing back the fairness doctrine, what's your plan for barring websites and newspapers from censoring content they don't wish to carry, and does it go both ways? Will liberal articles have to be allowed on Breitbart? Leftist comments in /r/TheDonald?
Decent idea, I'm not sure it would've avoided this problem entirely (there would've still been the problem of selective issuance of lD verification), but that definitely would've been an improvement.