Don't talk about facts right in front of my face! How dare you? If I wanted that I'd watch Fox News!
Obviously the solution to this bad legislation is to put everyone into the pool the bad legislation already dumps 47% of the people into. That's right: Medicare.
So I guess that's okay then, that you are forcing me to do something I don't want to do? Because you think society is a socialist idea? So that makes it okay for you to rob farmers of their land and dilute the savings of millions of people who spend hard days working for years on end? All so you can take that money and give it to people to sit on their couches, watch cable, and deal drugs on the side. That's okay with you?
What planet the hell side of Mercury are you on?
Socialism has no claim on the word "society" any more than Impressionism has claim to Art. Your logical fallacy is both ignorant and offensive.
And of course going into more debt and spending a cool trillion on diapers, baby formula, and Obama's 2014 campaign is the perfect investment to inspire international confidence.
US citizens may also find it odd that the US government OUTSOURCED their health care exchange system to the tune of $600 million dollars (so far).
So that's sending $600 million dollars of jobs and infrastructure straight out of the US economy because... why?
I guess that would be the interest in banning "assault weapons": perhaps the styling and design give the user more "psychological willingness to fight" even though these rifles are no different than standard hunting rifles.
I thought IE 10 and after were sand-boxed? Or is it the nature of the buffer overrun that the injection gets CPU level access?
According to the advisory they only get current user-level access. How do they run a buffer overrun exploit that actual stays in the user-context and doesn't go all the way to the CPU?
I disagree. The article is merely spinning the results based on their own bias.
“We’ve definitely worried about that,” Shafir says. Science, though, is coalescing around the opposite explanation. “All the data shows it isn't about poor people, it’s about people who happen to be in poverty. All the data suggests it is not the person, it's the context they’re inhabiting.”
Shafir is making a non-statement here. "poor people" == "people who happen to be in poverty". This statement does not disprove that people's monetary reasoning is a factor.
Also, science does not coalesce, nor does data suggest; these ideas are derived by the people running the study.
I do not see where in the study people who were good with money were subjected to the demands of poverty had their IQ decrease: that would be more telling. Merely saying that people who are recently working with or comfortable with large amounts do better with on-the-spot questions about large amounts, than people who are not as familiar with those sums is not proof of an IQ drop due to "poverty load".
So people who are poor are not smart about money. People who are smarter about money are not as poor.
The study fails to show that the mental load of poverty is separate from an innate lack of monetary reasoning in the individual. The study omits supporting evidence for its premise.
How do you know? It may have worked perfectly. The nice thing about monitoring all the Internet traffic in the country, is one has access to all the Internet traffic in the country.
Maybe some clandestine government operating budget needed a little walking around money. See Swordfish.
The fact that effort has been so effective that it is now influencing their own country goes to show that propaganda over time can be as dangerous as nuclear fallout in that it didn't stay limited to the target. Obviously, homosexuality has a history much older than 1917, but that probably doesn't make the former KGB over there any more inclined to take their "gay-tolerance medicine".
Maybe for services, but it still baffles me how even with the latest OS/2 release the mouse still didn't track smoothly and the GUI was easily process locked. You
couldn't work in that environment without pulling your hair out trying to get anything done.
Compared to NT, for user experience, OS/2 never had a chance.
Nationalized health care systems *fail* would like to control these types of personal activities since the individual's health care is subsidized. Take your pill citizen!
Compared with a modern military "citizens with guns" are really nothing more than rock-throwers. (And you're right, this can be effective: Afghanistan is a great example of organized rock-throwers prevailing in the long-run)
It seems to me, the idea of the United States ensuring its citizens retained weapons was to achieve what you're describing: equality, and equality between the people and the people chosen to govern; not allowing the appointed governors' access to fire-power make them superior to the people. This arrangement is a last resort of sorts to ensure the governors were acting with mutual interest in the nation, instead of launching out to oppress individuals because of the power of their position
I disagree that attempting unilateral disarmament is going to help. Enforcing an artificial constraint on what constitutes appropriate arms is asking people to lie to themselves: for example that a literal rock with enough people is effective in keeping the governors with BlackHawks and cruise missiles from making oppressive choices.
We are barely adequate to this end. If anything we need more power equity, not less.
Slashdot Mirror
Don't talk about facts right in front of my face!
How dare you?
If I wanted that I'd watch Fox News!
Obviously the solution to this bad legislation is to put everyone into the pool the bad legislation already dumps 47% of the people into.
That's right: Medicare.
That's telling 'em happy ol' boy...
How will they maintain these slim margins if they have to oversee vehicle trackers?
The problem for lawmakers is that the existing per-gallon gas tax has hit a point of diminishing returns
Because when you do exactly nothing to get 30-40 cents a gallon for someone elses product and distribution diminishing returns is really meaningful.
You can be sure they will keep their 100% profit tax per gallon and tax the consumer per mile.
How on earth did this get modded Insightful?
So I guess that's okay then, that you are forcing me to do something I don't want to do? Because you think society is a socialist idea? So that makes it okay for you to rob farmers of their land and dilute the savings of millions of people who spend hard days working for years on end? All so you can take that money and give it to people to sit on their couches, watch cable, and deal drugs on the side. That's okay with you?
What planet the hell side of Mercury are you on?
Socialism has no claim on the word "society" any more than Impressionism has claim to Art. Your logical fallacy is both ignorant and offensive.
Now get off my lawn!
Oh, I have no doubt it will be trickling down — to the 990,000 people in Canada.
Marxist cake-eaters logging mock-panic to cement allegiance to their socialist mafia. Hark nerdary! Bow before your propagandist masters!
And of course going into more debt and spending a cool trillion on diapers, baby formula, and Obama's 2014 campaign is the perfect investment to inspire international confidence.
US citizens may also find it odd that the US government OUTSOURCED their health care exchange system to the tune of $600 million dollars (so far). ... why?
So that's sending $600 million dollars of jobs and infrastructure straight out of the US economy because
Yeah, just keep telling yourself that. Drink much Kool-Aid lately?
I guess that would be the interest in banning "assault weapons": perhaps the styling and design give the user more "psychological willingness to fight" even though these rifles are no different than standard hunting rifles.
That's nothing. I have feelings for my car.
I thought IE 10 and after were sand-boxed? Or is it the nature of the buffer overrun that the injection gets CPU level access?
According to the advisory they only get current user-level access. How do they run a buffer overrun exploit that actual stays in the user-context and doesn't go all the way to the CPU?
I disagree. The article is merely spinning the results based on their own bias.
“We’ve definitely worried about that,” Shafir says. Science, though, is coalescing around the opposite explanation. “All the data shows it isn't about poor people, it’s about people who happen to be in poverty. All the data suggests it is not the person, it's the context they’re inhabiting.”
Shafir is making a non-statement here. "poor people" == "people who happen to be in poverty". This statement does not disprove that people's monetary reasoning is a factor.
Also, science does not coalesce, nor does data suggest; these ideas are derived by the people running the study.
I do not see where in the study people who were good with money were subjected to the demands of poverty had their IQ decrease: that would be more telling. Merely saying that people who are recently working with or comfortable with large amounts do better with on-the-spot questions about large amounts, than people who are not as familiar with those sums is not proof of an IQ drop due to "poverty load".
So people who are poor are not smart about money. People who are smarter about money are not as poor.
The study fails to show that the mental load of poverty is separate from an innate lack of monetary reasoning in the individual. The study omits supporting evidence for its premise.
"I don't have time to spend actually even thinking about what comes next."
Steve Ballmer — CEO, Microsoft
How do you know? It may have worked perfectly. The nice thing about monitoring all the Internet traffic in the country, is one has access to all the Internet traffic in the country.
Maybe some clandestine government operating budget needed a little walking around money. See Swordfish.
The only reason Russians are anti-gay is because they planned the promotion of homosexuality against the west during the Cold War.
The Naked Communist
The fact that effort has been so effective that it is now influencing their own country goes to show that propaganda over time can be as dangerous as nuclear fallout in that it didn't stay limited to the target. Obviously, homosexuality has a history much older than 1917, but that probably doesn't make the former KGB over there any more inclined to take their "gay-tolerance medicine".
Paul Ryan the savior of the Socialist State of Wisconsin is too "right-wing"?
You Saul Alinskites don't even know good when you get it.
I kind of wondered about this when the d.root-server moved to the University of Maryland.
http://blog.icann.org/2012/12/d-root/
Maybe it's not a big deal, but somehow "University of Maryland" seems like just another way of saying "NSA annex B"
Maybe for services, but it still baffles me how even with the latest OS/2 release the mouse still didn't track smoothly and the GUI was easily process locked. You couldn't work in that environment without pulling your hair out trying to get anything done.
Compared to NT, for user experience, OS/2 never had a chance.
Nationalized health care systems *fail* would like to control these types of personal activities since the individual's health care is subsidized.
Take your pill citizen!
I wouldn't mind taking this one on. Sure it's already been done, but I'm sure they'd pay to have it done again.
My only stipulation is that I'd want to do it all myself with just one business analyst and one quality control tester.
I think I could manage it in 3 years at 3 million dollars. However I'd probably cause the loss of 10,000 jobs so its probably not going to happen :)
The arms race faces the fact that evil exists in the world and requires force to dissuade or repel.
The disarmament race assumes everyone, even one's worst enemy will constantly cooperate with one's value-system: idealism bordering on the delusional.
Compared with a modern military "citizens with guns" are really nothing more than rock-throwers. (And you're right, this can be effective: Afghanistan is a great example of organized rock-throwers prevailing in the long-run)
It seems to me, the idea of the United States ensuring its citizens retained weapons was to achieve what you're describing: equality, and equality between the people and the people chosen to govern; not allowing the appointed governors' access to fire-power make them superior to the people. This arrangement is a last resort of sorts to ensure the governors were acting with mutual interest in the nation, instead of launching out to oppress individuals because of the power of their position
I disagree that attempting unilateral disarmament is going to help. Enforcing an artificial constraint on what constitutes appropriate arms is asking people to lie to themselves: for example that a literal rock with enough people is effective in keeping the governors with BlackHawks and cruise missiles from making oppressive choices.
We are barely adequate to this end. If anything we need more power equity, not less.
The man with a gun in a world of rock-throwers is King.