Well, obviously she messed up. It can't be the system, or the leaders. Nope. It must be the peons who just don't get it. They are at fault for everything.
But the point is, and this is why I have such little respect for feminists and other who harp on the "you're just blaming the victim" trope: bad things happen, sometimes to good people. Why would someone put themselves in such a situation in the first place, knowing that you live in a dangerous world?
Sure a woman should be able to walk-around naked and have only wanted attention, but in this world, she's going to have some unwanted, possibly physical, attention as well.
Larry Niven had that exact scenario in Ringworld. A woman could walk through Central Park in New York, wearing only a cape that hovered behind her, and not get attacked. Because of the security robots that kept everyone safe.
But when that system broke down, and everyone's primal instincts took over, guess what happened to the woman who had every right to walk around naked.
It's not exactly victim blaming if the victim could have acted in a more prudent manner. But in this case, a user of online storage isn't being negligent in assuming their backed up files are secure.
Why is that a given?
With all the stories and movie plots about hacking computers, why would anyone assume their cloud drive is safe? Why should people whose livelihood is in making those movies assume their online storage is safe?
We aren't talking about Jane Derp in Iowa here. We are talking about someone whose image is worth millions, who has personal assistants and managers, and who makes movies about breaking into/out of secure storage locations. Having them presented as some uninformed suburban housewife is rather ridiculous.
And I didn't say the towns were not wired, I said it costs a lot to wire them but is easy to do. I asked about "every farm spread across hundred of miles". Towns are not sparsely populated; that's part of the definition of "a town".
I may have a bias, but it isn't about whether every farm in Sweden has high speed internet to their doorstep.
How about we just compare all US states and European countries?
After repeatedly having the same reaction to these situations, I made a spreadsheet that compares the populations and sizes of US states and European countries. The first sheet is population, second is land area in square miles, and the third is population density per square mile. It also has columns on each page showing which countries are in the European Union, and which use the Euro as their currency.
Here are two links to it. The first is a direct download site, the second send a link to your email address. Use it as you wish.
How much of the "sparsely populated" part of Sweden is wired for high speed internet? It's easy to wire the small cities and larger towns. It's easy to wire all of the smaller towns, but it costs a lot more. It is very difficult to wire every farm spread across hundred of miles, and costs many times more.
After repeatedly having the same reaction to these situations, I made a spreadsheet that compares the populations and sizes of US states and European countries. The first sheet is population, second is land area in square miles, and the third is population density per square mile. It also has columns on each page showing which countries are in the European Union, and which use the Euro as their currency.
Here are two links to it. The first is a direct download site, the second send a link to your email address. Use it as you wish.
--- Also, specifically in regards to Sweden, its population is similar to North Carolina or Georgia, and is slightly larger than California. But most of its people are in the densely populated southern tip of the country, with the remainder mostly in small cities further north, and mostly along the coast. Relatively few live "out in the country".
Nah. I 've used this one for a while now. Not a big deal. The account names were good ones, but it isn't a big deal to have a mid-six-digits uid from around 2002.
Besides, once it switches to Beta only, I think most of us posters will go away for good.
Hey, I hear you. I left for several years myself. Unfortunately, I forgot the password for my previous account, and had to make a new one. It's actually my third one. Now I keep my password simple.
Never mind that a 99% safe vaccine is orders of magnitude more preferable than any of the vaccine preventable diseases.
As abies says, you are full of it. But to add to Ebola and AIDS, what about other diseases we vaccinate against? Polio, whooping cough/pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria? What is the percentage of non-vaccinated people who get those, compared to your 1% unsafe vaccine?
Also, it isn't 99% safe versus getting the disease, it is really 1% chance you die or are permanently disabled from the vaccine. Afterall, the anti-vaxxers aren't saying the vaccines are not effective defense against the diseases, they claim profound injury or death from the material in the vaccine.
Tell you what. Given that the models are making predictions as to what the temperature rise will be 100 years from now, I'll believe your models if you can make a prediction using current models for 2 years from now.
Don't make that promise.
They just produce 50 models that start with today's temperature, and have the first keep steady for one month then increase, the second keep steady for two months, the third for three months, etc. All of them will have a multiple-degree increase by the year 2100.
So whichever one is 'accurate' in two years, they'll still swear it is the perfect model to rebuke you with.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, obviously she messed up. It can't be the system, or the leaders. Nope. It must be the peons who just don't get it. They are at fault for everything.
Man, you have to stay out of your office. You are apparently drawing these creatures to you.
Go sit in the forest for a while, and let them settle on the tree branches around you.
Just a sec. Are you counting chickens raised strictly for slaughter?
How much money did Brokeback Mountain make? Over $80 million.
How much of that was guys willing to buy tickets for a gay cowboy movie, just to see Anne Hathaway's boobs?
That movie being her first topless role certainly lifted its box office revenue.
Jennifer Lawrence now doesn't have that option for some future 'gay football player' movie.
But the point is, and this is why I have such little respect for feminists and other who harp on the "you're just blaming the victim" trope: bad things happen, sometimes to good people. Why would someone put themselves in such a situation in the first place, knowing that you live in a dangerous world?
Sure a woman should be able to walk-around naked and have only wanted attention, but in this world, she's going to have some unwanted, possibly physical, attention as well.
Larry Niven had that exact scenario in Ringworld. A woman could walk through Central Park in New York, wearing only a cape that hovered behind her, and not get attacked. Because of the security robots that kept everyone safe.
But when that system broke down, and everyone's primal instincts took over, guess what happened to the woman who had every right to walk around naked.
Wait. Why aren't you refusing what the photos show? It's true, isn't it?
Ewww.
The law needs to track down that car if it is stolen but the person doing this is still an idiot.
A basic primer on contributory and comparative negligence
It's not exactly victim blaming if the victim could have acted in a more prudent manner.
But in this case, a user of online storage isn't being negligent in assuming their backed up files are secure.
Why is that a given?
With all the stories and movie plots about hacking computers, why would anyone assume their cloud drive is safe? Why should people whose livelihood is in making those movies assume their online storage is safe?
We aren't talking about Jane Derp in Iowa here. We are talking about someone whose image is worth millions, who has personal assistants and managers, and who makes movies about breaking into/out of secure storage locations. Having them presented as some uninformed suburban housewife is rather ridiculous.
For some reason, I have a strange desire to believe whatever you say about insuring expensive cars.
I think the AC had a point. She didn't do any nude/topless scenes yet. In Hollywood, that is a "nice girl" image.
Now that her tits have been seen, she doesn't have that revered position on the pedestal anymore.
Good one.
Only straight from the source. Until my wife pushes me away.
*sniff* *sniff*
Excuse me sir. Your algore smells like an asshole.
null post
--
Tired of partisan politics? Demand a split ticket - Green Party President with a Libertarian Vice-president.
rewrites the subject line just to grab attention.
I have no idea what you just said, but I will defend unto death your right to mangle sentences that way.
And I didn't say the towns were not wired, I said it costs a lot to wire them but is easy to do. I asked about "every farm spread across hundred of miles". Towns are not sparsely populated; that's part of the definition of "a town".
I may have a bias, but it isn't about whether every farm in Sweden has high speed internet to their doorstep.
How about we just compare all US states and European countries?
After repeatedly having the same reaction to these situations, I made a spreadsheet that compares the populations and sizes of US states and European countries. The first sheet is population, second is land area in square miles, and the third is population density per square mile. It also has columns on each page showing which countries are in the European Union, and which use the Euro as their currency.
Here are two links to it. The first is a direct download site, the second send a link to your email address. Use it as you wish.
http://s000.tinyupload.com/?fi...
http://www.filehosting.org/fil...
How much of the "sparsely populated" part of Sweden is wired for high speed internet? It's easy to wire the small cities and larger towns. It's easy to wire all of the smaller towns, but it costs a lot more. It is very difficult to wire every farm spread across hundred of miles, and costs many times more.
After repeatedly having the same reaction to these situations, I made a spreadsheet that compares the populations and sizes of US states and European countries. The first sheet is population, second is land area in square miles, and the third is population density per square mile. It also has columns on each page showing which countries are in the European Union, and which use the Euro as their currency.
Here are two links to it. The first is a direct download site, the second send a link to your email address. Use it as you wish.
http://s000.tinyupload.com/?fi...
http://www.filehosting.org/fil...
---
Also, specifically in regards to Sweden, its population is similar to North Carolina or Georgia, and is slightly larger than California. But most of its people are in the densely populated southern tip of the country, with the remainder mostly in small cities further north, and mostly along the coast. Relatively few live "out in the country".
Nah. I 've used this one for a while now. Not a big deal. The account names were good ones, but it isn't a big deal to have a mid-six-digits uid from around 2002.
Besides, once it switches to Beta only, I think most of us posters will go away for good.
Hey, I hear you. I left for several years myself. Unfortunately, I forgot the password for my previous account, and had to make a new one. It's actually my third one. Now I keep my password simple.
Thank god we still have Ralph Wiggam here. :^P
Never mind that a 99% safe vaccine is orders of magnitude more preferable than any of the vaccine preventable diseases.
As abies says, you are full of it. But to add to Ebola and AIDS, what about other diseases we vaccinate against? Polio, whooping cough/pertussis, tetanus, diphtheria? What is the percentage of non-vaccinated people who get those, compared to your 1% unsafe vaccine?
Also, it isn't 99% safe versus getting the disease, it is really 1% chance you die or are permanently disabled from the vaccine. Afterall, the anti-vaxxers aren't saying the vaccines are not effective defense against the diseases, they claim profound injury or death from the material in the vaccine.
You are claiming models are in that realm.
Tell you what. Given that the models are making predictions as to what the temperature rise will be 100 years from now, I'll believe your models if you can make a prediction using current models for 2 years from now.
Don't make that promise.
They just produce 50 models that start with today's temperature, and have the first keep steady for one month then increase, the second keep steady for two months, the third for three months, etc. All of them will have a multiple-degree increase by the year 2100.
So whichever one is 'accurate' in two years, they'll still swear it is the perfect model to rebuke you with.
And he just told us that the data that he does get from the NOAA is not reliable where he lives.
You've been knocked out.