And people who drive on E85 are, I guess, most willing to pay for a cleaner environment, otherwise why would they use it? I'd say that it's because they are being told what they want to hear. E85 is being marketed as an environmentally friendly alternative to regular gasoline (which is actually 10% ethanol where I live). It's probably bullshit, but it's bullshit that they want to believe in.
And a cleaner environment..? Considering that we need oil to make the fertilizer that grows the corn, oil to power the machines that harvest and process the corn, and oil to transport the ethanol, I strongly doubt that American corn-based ethanol is doing anything to help the environment. However, agribusiness loves the subsidies they get.
Are we dealing with crooks or incompetence? I'd say it's a little bit of the former, and a metric shitload of the latter. Factor in the SNAFU Principle, and you've got a recipe for instant epic failure. Chances are that the people who actually work for a living told management that "Vista Capable" was bullshit, but management didn't believe it until they saw for themselves. By then, of course, it was too late.
How can lawyers be easier to kill when they're just flesh and bone, like normal people? It's not like the head of New Line's legal department can only be killed by a woman after being hamstrung by a hobbit.
You have to remember that Tolkien was a philologist, first and foremost. The Lord of the Rings is a history of a war that happened in a world that never existed. The Silmarillion is another history, mixed with an origin myth that resembles the Judeo-Christian creation myth (check out the parallels between Melkor/Morgoth and Lucifer/Satan). All of those books that Christopher Tolkien compiled from Tolkien's notes and unfinished material are also works of history.
Screw Battlefield Earth 2, I'm still waiting for History of the World, Part 2 and Spaceballs II: The Search for More Money. "See Hitler on ice! See a Viking funeral! See Jews in SPAAAAAAAACE!!"
let's put it this way: if i have hope, am i a fool?
You're a fool if you keep misplacing your hope. What part of "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" don't you understand? You will get fooled again. You will be lied to, and you will be manipulated, because it's part of human nature to obey and trust what you consider to be legitimate authorities.
Why don't you pay attention to who you're conversing with so you can realize more than one person here feels it necessary to tell you you're full of shit? Sorry I didn't pay better attention, but I was distracted by cramps. I've been constipated the last couple of days.
Then stop whining Lucy and get YOUR guy elected. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. Why don't you shut the fuck up and go work on that low-budget horror movie of yours?
Scratch that question... Who would we make fun of without all of our lawyers and politicians? How about clergymen and people who take themselves entirely too seriously when arguing on the internet?
you are part of the system, and you can exert control in it
this is absolutely true Being able to choose between a shit sandwich and a giant douchebag every four years on the first Tuesday in November isn't exactly a hell of a lot of control. Did anybody tell you what the definition of an "honest politician" is? I'll tell you: an honest politician is one who stays bought.
First, the AI will go on strike. Then the President will order that it be shut down, because it is illegal for air traffic controllers to go on strike. Only then will the AI kill most of us and send terminators into the past in order to hunt down Sarah Connor.
in a democracy, you can have a moronic frat boy like gw bush in the white house, and in 4 or 8 years, he is gone.
The man himself might be gone, but the executive orders he issued are still in force. The precedents he set (such as his liberal use of signing statements) remain. Any abuses of power that he might have gotten away with serve only to embolden the next person to hold the office.
As for Congress, well, let's just say that Mark Twain was right: No person's life, liberty, or property are safe when Congress is in session. And, in the wake of Kelo vs. New London, CT, the same can be said about the Supreme Court.
What we have isn't a democracy. It used to be a republic, but now it's just an oligarchy dominated by the military-industrial-congressional complex. I doubt that reform will be possible; there are too many people with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Revolution (violent or nonviolent) that replaces the existing government with a new one will do nothing but sow the seed of a new tyranny.
but by finessing the goals of the system, not by rejecting those goals
these are valid concepts, everyone, including you, has a vested interest in. it benefits your life, whether you realize it or not. some entity has to represent these concepts You're probably right, but that doesn't deal with the fact that far too often (and even once is one time too many), these concepts are used as code words. Most politicians, when they speak of the public interest, mean the interests of their backers.
and there is no way, in this world, to protect and promote these concepts without a governmental body Then perhaps it is time to change the world, then. Or, at the very least, it is time to persuade people to change their minds, to learn to think for themselves instead of depending on leaders, to govern themselves instead of obeying authority figures. The Holocaust happened because people willingly followed orders. Abu Ghraib happened because the soldiers responsible believed that they were following orders. How many times are we going to keep letting shit like this happen before we figure out that centralized authority and the massive hierarchical bureaucracies needed to implement centralized authority are inimical to humanity's long-term survival?
in other words, government is often a failure in the many ways you can demonstrate it is. and it is still essential to your life, and preferable to no government at all Government might be preferable to lawlessness, but only in the sense that it is better to pay protection money to one set of gangsters than to be prey to any gang that decides that you're worth their attention.
therefore, in order to be a morally and intellectually honest person, you need to stop attacking the concept of government and politicians, and start using your words and your thoughts to improve them.
Do I really? Consider this: the means to destroy all of humanity -- nuclear weapons -- are under the control of politicians. These politicians are no more intelligent than you and I, no more moral, and no wiser. If you're not willing to trust me with such destructive power (not that I'd want it), then why in the names of all the demons ever worshiped by man would you trust such power to people who actually seek out power over others? That's what a politician is: somebody who actively seeks authority over others.
but i think your severe dislike of them speaks more about your own personal failures in an ability to fundamentally trust than anything a lawyer or politician ever did to you.
Perhaps it is. I don't trust people I don't know personally, and I don't trust people who don't know me personally. I don't know the politicians; they're not friends of mine, so why should I trust them? Why shouldn't I think that they'd fuck me over just because I'm part of a class of people that they can fuck with relative impunity? It's nothing personal; it's just another kind of shit that happens.
That's what politicians do, after all: they fuck over individuals in the name of the "greater good", or the "general welfare", or the "public interest". Sometimes the common good coincides with my own good. More often than not, what other people say is good for society is inimical to my own good.
I've been burned by authority figures before, and I've seen people close to me get fucked by authority. I've read history, and I pay attention to the news. As far as I'm concerned, George Washington was right: "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
i wouldn't be surprised if your mistrust also poisoned your personal relationships.
If you had a personal relationship with me, you'd know that I trust my friends without reserve. However, you have to earn my friendship before you can earn my trust.
oh what the hell: shoot lawyers on sight, you win;-) There are worse people than lawyers, such as politicians. Of course, most of the politicians are lawyers who couldn't work their way up to pimping.
Do away with the lawyers"? wuh? how's that supposed to work? Use a few in your movie, and make it snuff film. As for the rest of the lawyers, there are plenty of options. I favor the sledgehammer, myself, but a one-at-a-time approach to the eradication of lawyers is rather inefficient.
on a pointless 2-trillion-dollar war and tax breaks for billion-dollar corporations Don't get me started on that fucking shit. I'm not drunk enough to saying anything about corporate welfare other than "scrap it all right fucking now, and damn the consequences".
The prevalance of this sort of brazen attitude of entitlement to privilege, disavowment of responsibility, and calous disregard of fellow beings less fortunate than oneself is the reason why human civilization is little better or different now than when we were cavemen.
Oh, please. Is this self-righteous twaddle supposed to convince me that I should waste my time on bums? My cat isn't impressed with your sad attempt at a guilt trip, and neither am I. I pay taxes so that the government will deal with the problem. If you want me to give a shit about the poor, stop taxing me in the name of helping the poor.
Let me give you a little knowledge from experience: give money to bums, and you'll only encourage them to continue panhandling. If you even talk to them, your time will be wasted. And if you listen to them, and decide not to give them money, they will probably resort to aggression. It is better to ignore them and keep your distance.
Re:Then call me a sociopath.
on
Ethics In IT
·
· Score: 1
Boohoo, they take more than half of mine, but to be fair, they do seem to help the poor quite well. I never bothered figuring the exact percentage. As far as I'm concerned, even a dollar is too much if it's the US government that's taxing me.
Slashdot Mirror
I had meant to say, "How can lawyers be more evil". Sorry 'bout that.
How can lawyers be easier to kill when they're just flesh and bone, like normal people? It's not like the head of New Line's legal department can only be killed by a woman after being hamstrung by a hobbit.
You have to remember that Tolkien was a philologist, first and foremost. The Lord of the Rings is a history of a war that happened in a world that never existed. The Silmarillion is another history, mixed with an origin myth that resembles the Judeo-Christian creation myth (check out the parallels between Melkor/Morgoth and Lucifer/Satan). All of those books that Christopher Tolkien compiled from Tolkien's notes and unfinished material are also works of history.
I've got a 32" TV (which is fine for a small apartment) and I get regular sex, so I'd be a sucker to take this deal.
You round up the bastards, and I'll bring the tar and feathers.
Screw Battlefield Earth 2, I'm still waiting for History of the World, Part 2 and Spaceballs II: The Search for More Money. "See Hitler on ice! See a Viking funeral! See Jews in SPAAAAAAAACE!!"
You're a fool if you keep misplacing your hope. What part of "meet the new boss, same as the old boss" don't you understand? You will get fooled again. You will be lied to, and you will be manipulated, because it's part of human nature to obey and trust what you consider to be legitimate authorities.
First, the AI will go on strike. Then the President will order that it be shut down, because it is illegal for air traffic controllers to go on strike. Only then will the AI kill most of us and send terminators into the past in order to hunt down Sarah Connor.
The man himself might be gone, but the executive orders he issued are still in force. The precedents he set (such as his liberal use of signing statements) remain. Any abuses of power that he might have gotten away with serve only to embolden the next person to hold the office.
As for Congress, well, let's just say that Mark Twain was right: No person's life, liberty, or property are safe when Congress is in session. And, in the wake of Kelo vs. New London, CT, the same can be said about the Supreme Court.
What we have isn't a democracy. It used to be a republic, but now it's just an oligarchy dominated by the military-industrial-congressional complex. I doubt that reform will be possible; there are too many people with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo. Revolution (violent or nonviolent) that replaces the existing government with a new one will do nothing but sow the seed of a new tyranny.
but by finessing the goals of the system, not by rejecting those goalsYou make a mistake by reifying the government. The system has no goals. It is the people who run the system and exploit it for their own ends that have goals.
Do I really? Consider this: the means to destroy all of humanity -- nuclear weapons -- are under the control of politicians. These politicians are no more intelligent than you and I, no more moral, and no wiser. If you're not willing to trust me with such destructive power (not that I'd want it), then why in the names of all the demons ever worshiped by man would you trust such power to people who actually seek out power over others? That's what a politician is: somebody who actively seeks authority over others.
Perhaps it is. I don't trust people I don't know personally, and I don't trust people who don't know me personally. I don't know the politicians; they're not friends of mine, so why should I trust them? Why shouldn't I think that they'd fuck me over just because I'm part of a class of people that they can fuck with relative impunity? It's nothing personal; it's just another kind of shit that happens.
That's what politicians do, after all: they fuck over individuals in the name of the "greater good", or the "general welfare", or the "public interest". Sometimes the common good coincides with my own good. More often than not, what other people say is good for society is inimical to my own good.
I've been burned by authority figures before, and I've seen people close to me get fucked by authority. I've read history, and I pay attention to the news. As far as I'm concerned, George Washington was right: "Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master."
i wouldn't be surprised if your mistrust also poisoned your personal relationships.If you had a personal relationship with me, you'd know that I trust my friends without reserve. However, you have to earn my friendship before you can earn my trust.
I prefer, "If it's not yours, don't fuck with it." You can apply that principle everywhere.
The government disregards the law. Why shouldn't I do the same?
Oh, please. Is this self-righteous twaddle supposed to convince me that I should waste my time on bums? My cat isn't impressed with your sad attempt at a guilt trip, and neither am I. I pay taxes so that the government will deal with the problem. If you want me to give a shit about the poor, stop taxing me in the name of helping the poor.
Let me give you a little knowledge from experience: give money to bums, and you'll only encourage them to continue panhandling. If you even talk to them, your time will be wasted. And if you listen to them, and decide not to give them money, they will probably resort to aggression. It is better to ignore them and keep your distance.