Yes, this is exactly the kind of mental contortionism we need less of. You can justify anything as Constitutional if you're willing to twist that far, and thus the Constitution would offer the citizens no protection at all against the government.
Of course, there's a growing group of people in the US who are OK with that.
So the NYT is publishing government sponsored 'fake news'?
Some of us believe they did that continuous during the Obama administration. But it's not about the NYT, it's about "is something related to UFOS credible just because it was in a leaked government file?". History says: no.
Both parties prefer to keep abortion as a wedge issue.
While I agree with your cynicism, you'd think an actual bill would be more high-profile. I think the truth is: the Republican politicians don't actually want to vote pro-life in such an explicit way, as they don't actually care about the issue but they do care about the DC social scene.
Still pisses me off though, as I think a set of very pro-Constitution Justices is the only long-term hope for the US. Of course, then the right would have to confront the fact that the Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to stop citizens from selling and using weed within state lines.
Indeed. For one, Betteridge's Law of Headlines fails us. The FCC might have been over-reaching their congress-assigned power when the attempted net neutrality, and it was certainly in their power to stop doing that. But that was without any law to back them up. In fact, that was one reason libertarian opponents were worried about the whole thing - it seemed like such an extra-legal extension of their charter.
Pass an actual law, though? Totally different situation. Then the FCC would be unquestionably justified in enforcing that law, without the specter of unelected bureaucrats deciding how ISPs work.
Of course - the same is true about abortion. There's still nothing in the Constitution that remotely protects that right, total fabrication by the court to reflect the changing views of Americans. But not that long ago we had a pro-choice President, Senate, and House - where was the law protecting "a woman's right to choose"? Total lack of courage for a law that was certain to pass, and would end the worry about Justices that love the constitution overturning Roe v Wade.
: âoeAll that compelling" or not, the military-grade data files that were released looked like pretty damn realistic fighter-plane-meets-UFO videos to me. Whatâ(TM)s MORE compelling then?
If you're old enough, you remember Project Blue Book . It stands out as the government's best, and perhaps only, long term conspiracy to hide information from the public that actually worked.
The SR-71 was a very important weapon in the cold war, and its secrecy was paramount during development. After all, what's the point of a super-secret spy plane that the opponent already knows about? But building such a difficult plane with so much new technology would require constant test flights and people would see the secret spy plane throughout development. Credible people, like airline pilots and military pilots would see experimental planes that outperformed anything they'd imagined and word was sure to leak. What to do? How to keep the secret?
The answer was amazingly clever. America was UFO-crazy anyway, so the government starting projects to investigate UFO sightings. Those projects themselves were "secret", but leaked to make sure every conspiracy theorists knew about them and took them seriously. Then, any time someone credible saw the testbeds and eventually actual prototypes of the SR-71 doing what no plane was thought to be capable of, they were interviewed about theur UFO sighting.
Thus, the one conspiracy that worked. By treating every sighting of our secret spy plane in development as "secret UFO evidence", when the Russians inevitably heard about all the sightings of a plane that flew higher and faster than should be possible, they were all dismissed as American UFO nonsense. Fooled the public too - it's only recently that the people involved have started talking as a lot of it is 50 years old now.
Yes there is evidence. Turns out it was faked, mostly be Fusion GPS, a company in the business of election-time smearjobs. Do you watch "Scandal" - companies like that that make scandals go away are real, as are the opposite: companies that create scandals.
It's the real inner workings of government, part of how the people who are actually in power determine who gets elected. I can't even guess whether Trump represents some now power group, or was genuinely elected despite the system. Interesting times.
The company that placed the ad broke the law. The only reason to blame Facebook is the size of their pockets.
Both are to blame. Facebook build a system that allowed job ads (and housing ads!) to be filtered on protected classes. This is no different from a realtor who chooses not to show houses to black people - definitely illegal.
Watch out for your own best interest. Your employer will be doing the same
If you're still working at a shitty place late in life, then sure - why even give notice? But if you're working somewhere reasonable, there's no reason to be a dick.
Retirement is coming up for me in the next few years. I plan to let my boss know informally about a year ahead of time that retirement is looming, and he should plan accordingly. I don't want him to be surprised when I give 2 weeks notice, but that's all the formal notice I'll give the company.
That being said, you should be able to retire for at least a couple years before you actually retire. This is important! When you get to the point that you believe you can live acceptably on your savings, don't stop working immediately. It really sucks to be wrong about how much you need - I've seen it, and it's not pretty. Soldier on for a couple more years to account for errors in prediction about what life holds.
If you do that, and your company uses knowledge of your plans and screws you by e.g. firing you 3 months before you had planned to retire, then you don't really care. You should be able to retire for some time before you'd even think of warning your boss that you plan to actually retire, for so many reasons.
there is NOTHING wrong with trying to make your work life as productive as possible.
Extremes are bad for you. Moderation makes for a happier life.
But, really, TFA is using the wrong terminology. The proper rant is "stop confusing activity with productivity!" If you fill your life with some way to be busy at all time, I have to wonder what you're running from. Efficiency is a good thing, but continuous frantic activity is not, despite both being approaches to productivity.
There's no "middle ground" to be had there. There's no, "well, you have a point, but...."
Fuck that noise. They don't deserve a seat at the table.
Yup, that's pretty much what Hitler said about the Jews. There's always an excuse to demonize those you don't like. The best cure for idiocy is exposing it to the light of day.
Socially, all a liberal has to do to become conservative as he ages is not change his social views. You'll find that's quite common, although sometimes people do actually become more conservative relative to their younger selves when they have kids. Having kids commonly changes one's attitude towards risk-taking in general.
Financially, people often become conservative once they have a stake in the system - once they have something to conserve. From the simple (and normal) selfishness of not wanting new taxes to hit the group one belongs to, to not wanting to disrupt the financial status quo once you have some real (and needed) retirement savings.
the false premise upon which a hundred million people died in the last century's misadventures in utopian collectivism
Closer to 200 million deaths, I believe (100 million just down to Mao). And people get all worked up over fascism, which, as evil as it is, is a rounding error in comparison.
C'mon it's not that bad - I'm sure the homebuilders have already begun the 6-month long application process and environmental assessment needed in order to begin the 6-month long public review phase required for project approval. Heck, in just a year they'll be on to the specific reviews and approvals for actual building plans!
That guy is doing science, so science is alive and well. What's changed is the loss of credibility of pretty much all establishments - everything got political, so nothing can be trusted.
Something like 85% of novel buyers are women, so while there's certainly some SJW nonsense happening, it's mostly just appealing to the broad market. I've heard it's almost mandatory for the past decade for any genre fiction to feature a strong female lead.
The big publishers are going the way of all mainstream media: everything appeals only to the biggest demographic, nothing ever for the niches. But self-publishing is now practical, and I figure it won't be long before we get a set of "indie publishers" that promote the few self-published works that aren't garbage. SF will return eventually.
You keep using that word, but I don't think is means what you think it means. "Censorship" is based on content "objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds".
The word you wanted was "blackhole" or "block" or something like that.
Sure, Comcast might try blocking Netflix. It would be nice to see a law preventing that sort of abuse of monopoly. We didn't have that before, though. Of course, if we did something sane like make the last mile a public utility, we could just let the market do it's thing, free of monopolies.
Depends on how the ship is constructed, but you probably don't want to rotate the fuel tanks, or the communications antennae/dishes, or deployed solar cells, or that sort of thing.
Sorry, are you seriously trying to say that Comcast, Time Warner, etc (The majority of ISPs are also TV providers) have no reason at all to want to censor Netflix, Amazon Video, Hulu?
Censor? No. How could they even do that to encrypted streams.
Throttle? Maybe, though their current approach of oversubscribing networks seems to work well enough as a throttle.
Do you understand that different words mean different things? Or do you actually believe that Comcast will be inserting black bars covering the boobies in your Netflix stream?
? Why would the budget for 1G versus 0.5G reflect a significant difference in cost?
Maybe 0.1 g is enough? But even if it's just half, that's half the structural weight of the rotating part of the ship, so half the cost of that part of the mission.
Why is this modded troll? Science Fiction of the sort I grew up reading has almost vanished. I'm not sure what the new Star Trek is, but it's not a voyage of discovery, misleading name aside. Everything SF seems to be dystopian now - hardly an inspiring vision of the future.
More troubling, was the hazard of using systems that you don't control, as evidenced by the AWS East-1 outage
Wherever your servers are, there is risk. What matters is the relative competence of the AWS guys vs the local IT department, which is going to vary considerably. If you've outsourced IT to the lowest bidder, chances are the AWS guys are the better bet.
Slashdot Mirror
Yes, this is exactly the kind of mental contortionism we need less of. You can justify anything as Constitutional if you're willing to twist that far, and thus the Constitution would offer the citizens no protection at all against the government.
Of course, there's a growing group of people in the US who are OK with that.
So the NYT is publishing government sponsored 'fake news'?
Some of us believe they did that continuous during the Obama administration. But it's not about the NYT, it's about "is something related to UFOS credible just because it was in a leaked government file?". History says: no.
Both parties prefer to keep abortion as a wedge issue.
While I agree with your cynicism, you'd think an actual bill would be more high-profile. I think the truth is: the Republican politicians don't actually want to vote pro-life in such an explicit way, as they don't actually care about the issue but they do care about the DC social scene.
Still pisses me off though, as I think a set of very pro-Constitution Justices is the only long-term hope for the US. Of course, then the right would have to confront the fact that the Constitution doesn't give the federal government the power to stop citizens from selling and using weed within state lines.
Of course it can
Indeed. For one, Betteridge's Law of Headlines fails us. The FCC might have been over-reaching their congress-assigned power when the attempted net neutrality, and it was certainly in their power to stop doing that. But that was without any law to back them up. In fact, that was one reason libertarian opponents were worried about the whole thing - it seemed like such an extra-legal extension of their charter.
Pass an actual law, though? Totally different situation. Then the FCC would be unquestionably justified in enforcing that law, without the specter of unelected bureaucrats deciding how ISPs work.
Of course - the same is true about abortion. There's still nothing in the Constitution that remotely protects that right, total fabrication by the court to reflect the changing views of Americans. But not that long ago we had a pro-choice President, Senate, and House - where was the law protecting "a woman's right to choose"? Total lack of courage for a law that was certain to pass, and would end the worry about Justices that love the constitution overturning Roe v Wade.
tldr: do your damn job, Congress.
: âoeAll that compelling" or not, the military-grade data files that were released looked like pretty damn realistic fighter-plane-meets-UFO videos to me. Whatâ(TM)s MORE compelling then?
If you're old enough, you remember Project Blue Book . It stands out as the government's best, and perhaps only, long term conspiracy to hide information from the public that actually worked.
The SR-71 was a very important weapon in the cold war, and its secrecy was paramount during development. After all, what's the point of a super-secret spy plane that the opponent already knows about? But building such a difficult plane with so much new technology would require constant test flights and people would see the secret spy plane throughout development. Credible people, like airline pilots and military pilots would see experimental planes that outperformed anything they'd imagined and word was sure to leak. What to do? How to keep the secret?
The answer was amazingly clever. America was UFO-crazy anyway, so the government starting projects to investigate UFO sightings. Those projects themselves were "secret", but leaked to make sure every conspiracy theorists knew about them and took them seriously. Then, any time someone credible saw the testbeds and eventually actual prototypes of the SR-71 doing what no plane was thought to be capable of, they were interviewed about theur UFO sighting.
Thus, the one conspiracy that worked. By treating every sighting of our secret spy plane in development as "secret UFO evidence", when the Russians inevitably heard about all the sightings of a plane that flew higher and faster than should be possible, they were all dismissed as American UFO nonsense. Fooled the public too - it's only recently that the people involved have started talking as a lot of it is 50 years old now.
Of course it can. Far far easier than determining your income and age from your posts.
There's evidence.
Yes there is evidence. Turns out it was faked, mostly be Fusion GPS, a company in the business of election-time smearjobs. Do you watch "Scandal" - companies like that that make scandals go away are real, as are the opposite: companies that create scandals.
It's the real inner workings of government, part of how the people who are actually in power determine who gets elected. I can't even guess whether Trump represents some now power group, or was genuinely elected despite the system. Interesting times.
The company that placed the ad broke the law. The only reason to blame Facebook is the size of their pockets.
Both are to blame. Facebook build a system that allowed job ads (and housing ads!) to be filtered on protected classes. This is no different from a realtor who chooses not to show houses to black people - definitely illegal.
The government *may not* discriminate
Just so you know, "may not" and "may" are synonyms. Either means "is allowed to choose". I doubt that's what you meant.
You misunderstand. People don't go to pilipino dating websites to recruit IT workers.
"Reminds me of the time I hired a Filipino call girl to do my IT while I banged my IT girl."
Watch out for your own best interest. Your employer will be doing the same
If you're still working at a shitty place late in life, then sure - why even give notice? But if you're working somewhere reasonable, there's no reason to be a dick.
Retirement is coming up for me in the next few years. I plan to let my boss know informally about a year ahead of time that retirement is looming, and he should plan accordingly. I don't want him to be surprised when I give 2 weeks notice, but that's all the formal notice I'll give the company.
That being said, you should be able to retire for at least a couple years before you actually retire. This is important! When you get to the point that you believe you can live acceptably on your savings, don't stop working immediately. It really sucks to be wrong about how much you need - I've seen it, and it's not pretty. Soldier on for a couple more years to account for errors in prediction about what life holds.
If you do that, and your company uses knowledge of your plans and screws you by e.g. firing you 3 months before you had planned to retire, then you don't really care. You should be able to retire for some time before you'd even think of warning your boss that you plan to actually retire, for so many reasons.
there is NOTHING wrong with trying to make your work life as productive as possible.
Extremes are bad for you. Moderation makes for a happier life.
But, really, TFA is using the wrong terminology. The proper rant is "stop confusing activity with productivity!" If you fill your life with some way to be busy at all time, I have to wonder what you're running from. Efficiency is a good thing, but continuous frantic activity is not, despite both being approaches to productivity.
Totalitarians always have an excuse why this time it's OK to crack down.
There's no "middle ground" to be had there. There's no, "well, you have a point, but...."
Fuck that noise. They don't deserve a seat at the table.
Yup, that's pretty much what Hitler said about the Jews. There's always an excuse to demonize those you don't like. The best cure for idiocy is exposing it to the light of day.
Socially, all a liberal has to do to become conservative as he ages is not change his social views. You'll find that's quite common, although sometimes people do actually become more conservative relative to their younger selves when they have kids. Having kids commonly changes one's attitude towards risk-taking in general.
Financially, people often become conservative once they have a stake in the system - once they have something to conserve. From the simple (and normal) selfishness of not wanting new taxes to hit the group one belongs to, to not wanting to disrupt the financial status quo once you have some real (and needed) retirement savings.
the false premise upon which a hundred million people died in the last century's misadventures in utopian collectivism
Closer to 200 million deaths, I believe (100 million just down to Mao). And people get all worked up over fascism, which, as evil as it is, is a rounding error in comparison.
C'mon it's not that bad - I'm sure the homebuilders have already begun the 6-month long application process and environmental assessment needed in order to begin the 6-month long public review phase required for project approval. Heck, in just a year they'll be on to the specific reviews and approvals for actual building plans!
That guy is doing science, so science is alive and well. What's changed is the loss of credibility of pretty much all establishments - everything got political, so nothing can be trusted.
Something like 85% of novel buyers are women, so while there's certainly some SJW nonsense happening, it's mostly just appealing to the broad market. I've heard it's almost mandatory for the past decade for any genre fiction to feature a strong female lead.
The big publishers are going the way of all mainstream media: everything appeals only to the biggest demographic, nothing ever for the niches. But self-publishing is now practical, and I figure it won't be long before we get a set of "indie publishers" that promote the few self-published works that aren't garbage. SF will return eventually.
You keep using that word, but I don't think is means what you think it means. "Censorship" is based on content "objectionable on moral, political, military, or other grounds".
The word you wanted was "blackhole" or "block" or something like that.
Sure, Comcast might try blocking Netflix. It would be nice to see a law preventing that sort of abuse of monopoly. We didn't have that before, though. Of course, if we did something sane like make the last mile a public utility, we could just let the market do it's thing, free of monopolies.
Depends on how the ship is constructed, but you probably don't want to rotate the fuel tanks, or the communications antennae/dishes, or deployed solar cells, or that sort of thing.
Sorry, are you seriously trying to say that Comcast, Time Warner, etc (The majority of ISPs are also TV providers) have no reason at all to want to censor Netflix, Amazon Video, Hulu?
Censor? No. How could they even do that to encrypted streams.
Throttle? Maybe, though their current approach of oversubscribing networks seems to work well enough as a throttle.
Do you understand that different words mean different things? Or do you actually believe that Comcast will be inserting black bars covering the boobies in your Netflix stream?
? Why would the budget for 1G versus 0.5G reflect a significant difference in cost?
Maybe 0.1 g is enough? But even if it's just half, that's half the structural weight of the rotating part of the ship, so half the cost of that part of the mission.
Why is this modded troll? Science Fiction of the sort I grew up reading has almost vanished. I'm not sure what the new Star Trek is, but it's not a voyage of discovery, misleading name aside. Everything SF seems to be dystopian now - hardly an inspiring vision of the future.
More troubling, was the hazard of using systems that you don't control, as evidenced by the AWS East-1 outage
Wherever your servers are, there is risk. What matters is the relative competence of the AWS guys vs the local IT department, which is going to vary considerably. If you've outsourced IT to the lowest bidder, chances are the AWS guys are the better bet.