Privacy is the part of life where your personal ethics are found and expressed; and it is shared, smartly, with those who agree with said ethic and are included in the privacy.
In all of us, we have thoughts, acts, and materials in private, that if made public, would be construed to be 'evil' or 'wrong' in some form. There is no absolute ethic, though many genius minds like John Rawls have tried (and I agree with him, but some don't).
The big kicker for privacy is that the personal ethics you apply in said private situation needs to be agreed upon by those who are included -- and if not, one may end up facing public scrutiny, forced to disclose said privacy by way of evidence and testimony.
Everyone *needs* privacy, or we won't actually get along at all. Make all of our private lives public and we will all go to jail. Take away privacy permanently, and life IS jail.
By the way, I'm posting from a samsung, and was just on an apple at work.... reminds me of the OWS photo demonstrating how people cannot function in modern society with the dichotomy of "support the oligopolies or be dysfunctional".. The photo where people protesting corporations had corporate products.... We are so screwed.
...we had consumer power, so we could avoid these companies that banter back and forth like shitty brats.
Thanks to the same lawyer armies, no competition has survived gestation.
When society collapses and we return to dirt living, I will vote against these scum by simply not sharing where I got my water. better start gettin outdoors now lawyer goons!
No. The great depression was induced by a select few people who had massive market ownership that colluded to sell and crash the market to pull massive profit, wealth, and power out of the following collapse.
Go get a phd in economics, so you can understand how a tax break to the wealthy gives them incentive to hire an econ analyst in India, and since you're unemployed, you can be hired to repaint his house. That's what's real.
You don't understand how this works. The us execs outsource production to china, have children and impoverished people produce thepoduct for pennies, import for very low cost, then ramp the price up for profits that are only seen by the investment and elite classes of society, and the ceo of course. The local unemployment, thanks to outsourcing, increases skilled work supply, driving local wages down, and then you have the american phenomnon.. scientists on mediCal, or working at Sears. Engineers that can't afford a home, etc.
When your country represents you, it protects you frm being devalued in the face of profit for the very few.
Protective tarriffs are the best solution to our national ecnomic woes. You're acting like trade defcits and exploit of people and environment by proxy of "free trade" are acceptable so long as to keep one economy, China's, afloat. That's stupid.
Products from foreign sources ought be taxed to matc equal locally produced products. Labor/outsourcing for US businesses, done in places of very low cost of living, needs to be taxed as an import to maintain competitive involvement in employing our own people.
This is what a country that serves its people does to protect their overall beneft and stability. The only thing outsourced and chinese produced products does is it givesa slightly lower cost product, usually of inferior production quality, that only shareholders and ceos can benefit frm. Us employment drops, worker supply increases, and then you have skilled individuals that aren't capable of affording a home because wages are driven downward. Exacerbate the issue with h1b visas and you've got massive unemployment in the face of very few people reaping massive profits.
When your country representsyou, it doesn't let a very smal fraction fuck everyone else over like this.
Check this out.... I played bf2 so seriously and competitively that my clan has won a world championship (TGL 8v8). My clan, including me, has been awaiting bf3 for years. It recently came out, and I still don't own it.... they require you dl and install EA's clone of steam and run it alongsde the game, and then the server browser uses an external web browser...... uhhhh.. no.
I won't accept that trash. Game looks awesome, and I very highly anticipated it (having spent thousands of hours on the predecessors)..... but they're asking too much of me. I will pay an extra $5 on the price if that mde them happy, but in truth they want more from me than I'm willing to give.
On another thought, let me be clear and real with you. You will be ignored until you can demonstrate a realistic understanding of what "significance" means. All you've done so far is argue the contrary like some pedantic and immature buffoon. People get sick of repeating clear facts and arguments to irrational 'tards that make no effort at learning or understanding the topic they discuss, or even the words they use.
You don't get it. Society believes, based on evidence, that the few dipshits that don't immunize are putting others at risk. They incentivise the smart choice, in a way of saying "those who will take measures to keep us all safer get a tax break". This is to drive all people to make the smart choice....
I bet you would be even more upset if the incentive was percentage of income based, which *would* equally motivate the rich to immunize... and because they would have breaks in the hundreds of thousands while the poor only get hundreds.
So should the break be percentage based? It would be proportional, and equally incentivising....
The medicines you take and products you buy are largely less safe, by comparison of safety and fact based significance, and yet I'm positive you've made little or no effort find out.
Your 'science' only applies when it is convenient, and your points are based on exaggerated doubt. Please quit masquerading as a person of facts.
The rich will immunize because its a smart move. The poor will immunize because its a smart move.
Some people won't, and the society that doesn't like them becoming at-risk for rare-disease hostel/festoon, has decided that they can choose not to, but they won't get tax breaks.
And some rich people who want an extra lump of cash to burn in their fireplaces will do it because its a smart way to save some money, too. ---------- Now please quit exaggerating what doesn't really matter.
The facts and corroborating and overlapping data that supports the AGW consensus is far wider, deeper, validated, and significant than the postulations about the shape of the earth.
And since you are comparing one 'consensus' that was found false, to how many scientific consensus' that are still right; your argument even now still look like a person who exaggerates miniscule doubt as a means to attempt to say your argument has any significance. It doesn't.
As you should know, each and every one of those scientists who AGREE in the consensus, has thousands upon thousands of hours of real experience in the field that you have little knowledge of. And when they come to an agreement, it isn't just their numbers in consensus that have serious implication, but the validity and qualifications of each individual and how much more likely each and every one of them is more likely to be right than you, or I, or any news pundit.... Or the one or two climate scientists who were nobodies that became famous by challenging what in their field is obvious. It turned out recently that one of those three was paid by big oil to disagree.
You attacked the fact I mentioned consensus, and pretended that none of the science/facts that led to it existed when you challenged my point. Your argument is bullshit, as is your attempt to make insignificance look significant.
The data is pretty sound, and only those who don't know the difference continue to act like it is the data, not their ignorance, that doesn't make sense.
When all of the surgeons say to use aseptic technique, the nurse who doesn't understand the microbial infections are expected to follow anyway and spend some personal effor at learning why if they don't understand. I defer to the best minds, as you do. The difference being that you only do it when they agree with you and you hold to miniscule, yet exaggerated doubt, when they don't.
I understand science, and as a stem cell scientist, I have learned through my experience that the best scientists are the most likely to be right, and also that major consensus has serious validity. Also, as an infrmed and aware citizen, it is clear that capital interests have major power over information and perception. Some humility and realism would serve you well.
There aren't scientists on both sides if the argument... There are scientists on one side, and pro capital propaganda machines on the other, some masquerading as scientists but not applying scientific method.
Your perspective and attitude is largely determinant of your experience. Since yours is like a spoiled brat, you understand the world from that position. Given some maturity, and a few other keys to better living, your experiences (otherwise unchanged) would have had completely different impact on your life.
You will never understand; and so I'm only using you as a whipping post for setting example.
Employers with apropriate standards don't even care. Instead they monitor your total output and if it isn't eough, you are counseled, and later fired if you don't improve. And in my experience, telecommuters don't make efficient use of their time. You can blame facebook, coffee and cig breaks, being gabby, being distraught, being lazy, whatever.... output is what matters and management worth keeping are managers who focus on that. The best employers I know of, with the most highly performing employees, have very relaxed scheduling and limitations.... they simply expect high performance and won't keep you if you do less.
That is poor rail network flaw, not szome absolute barrier. If you've ever used european mass transit, you know th system can be designed well. You get on a bus for the ride to yojr local station, which connects to larger stations... there are multiple paths, fast trains that only top at major cities, and slower trains that split off and stop at each, or every other town. The efficiency is awesome, and you can beat a car easily.
Lol. Facts don't require faith. Youre just another christian wordsmith trying to sound smart but deliberately failing to use clear language for the purpose of ideological defense. Please use a dictionary.
Slashdot Mirror
Lol. This Paul guy is such a turd.
Privacy is the part of life where your personal ethics are found and expressed; and it is shared, smartly, with those who agree with said ethic and are included in the privacy.
In all of us, we have thoughts, acts, and materials in private, that if made public, would be construed to be 'evil' or 'wrong' in some form. There is no absolute ethic, though many genius minds like John Rawls have tried (and I agree with him, but some don't).
The big kicker for privacy is that the personal ethics you apply in said private situation needs to be agreed upon by those who are included -- and if not, one may end up facing public scrutiny, forced to disclose said privacy by way of evidence and testimony.
Everyone *needs* privacy, or we won't actually get along at all. Make all of our private lives public and we will all go to jail. Take away privacy permanently, and life IS jail.
Well, what other products are they going to have? It's rather hard to make your own cell-phone from scratch.
Exactly my point.
I wish you didn't sound like any of this matters...
By the way, I'm posting from a samsung, and was just on an apple at work.... reminds me of the OWS photo demonstrating how people cannot function in modern society with the dichotomy of "support the oligopolies or be dysfunctional".. The photo where people protesting corporations had corporate products.... We are so screwed.
...we had consumer power, so we could avoid these companies that banter back and forth like shitty brats.
Thanks to the same lawyer armies, no competition has survived gestation.
When society collapses and we return to dirt living, I will vote against these scum by simply not sharing where I got my water. better start gettin outdoors now lawyer goons!
You are a coward, not some rational safe better.
No. The great depression was induced by a select few people who had massive market ownership that colluded to sell and crash the market to pull massive profit, wealth, and power out of the following collapse.
Go get a phd in economics, so you can understand how a tax break to the wealthy gives them incentive to hire an econ analyst in India, and since you're unemployed, you can be hired to repaint his house. That's what's real.
You don't understand how this works. The us execs outsource production to china, have children and impoverished people produce thepoduct for pennies, import for very low cost, then ramp the price up for profits that are only seen by the investment and elite classes of society, and the ceo of course. The local unemployment, thanks to outsourcing, increases skilled work supply, driving local wages down, and then you have the american phenomnon.. scientists on mediCal, or working at Sears. Engineers that can't afford a home, etc.
When your country represents you, it protects you frm being devalued in the face of profit for the very few.
Protective tarriffs are the best solution to our national ecnomic woes. You're acting like trade defcits and exploit of people and environment by proxy of "free trade" are acceptable so long as to keep one economy, China's, afloat. That's stupid.
Products from foreign sources ought be taxed to matc equal locally produced products. Labor/outsourcing for US businesses, done in places of very low cost of living, needs to be taxed as an import to maintain competitive involvement in employing our own people.
This is what a country that serves its people does to protect their overall beneft and stability.
The only thing outsourced and chinese produced products does is it givesa slightly lower cost product, usually of inferior production quality, that only shareholders and ceos can benefit frm. Us employment drops, worker supply increases, and then you have skilled individuals that aren't capable of affording a home because wages are driven downward. Exacerbate the issue with h1b visas and you've got massive unemployment in the face of very few people reaping massive profits.
When your country representsyou, it doesn't let a very smal fraction fuck everyone else over like this.
and so you don't get a tax break.
I agree completely.
Check this out.... I played bf2 so seriously and competitively that my clan has won a world championship (TGL 8v8). My clan, including me, has been awaiting bf3 for years. It recently came out, and I still don't own it.... they require you dl and install EA's clone of steam and run it alongsde the game, and then the server browser uses an external web browser...... uhhhh.. no.
I won't accept that trash. Game looks awesome, and I very highly anticipated it (having spent thousands of hours on the predecessors)..... but they're asking too much of me. I will pay an extra $5 on the price if that mde them happy, but in truth they want more from me than I'm willing to give.
I know I'm not the only one to hold out.
On another thought, let me be clear and real with you. You will be ignored until you can demonstrate a realistic understanding of what "significance" means. All you've done so far is argue the contrary like some pedantic and immature buffoon. People get sick of repeating clear facts and arguments to irrational 'tards that make no effort at learning or understanding the topic they discuss, or even the words they use.
You don't get it. Society believes, based on evidence, that the few dipshits that don't immunize are putting others at risk. They incentivise the smart choice, in a way of saying "those who will take measures to keep us all safer get a tax break". This is to drive all people to make the smart choice....
I bet you would be even more upset if the incentive was percentage of income based, which *would* equally motivate the rich to immunize... and because they would have breaks in the hundreds of thousands while the poor only get hundreds.
So should the break be percentage based? It would be proportional, and equally incentivising....
The medicines you take and products you buy are largely less safe, by comparison of safety and fact based significance, and yet I'm positive you've made little or no effort find out.
Your 'science' only applies when it is convenient, and your points are based on exaggerated doubt. Please quit masquerading as a person of facts.
They aren't taking coverage away. You just made that up.
The rich will immunize because its a smart move. The poor will immunize because its a smart move.
Some people won't, and the society that doesn't like them becoming at-risk for rare-disease hostel/festoon, has decided that they can choose not to, but they won't get tax breaks.
And some rich people who want an extra lump of cash to burn in their fireplaces will do it because its a smart way to save some money, too.
----------
Now please quit exaggerating what doesn't really matter.
The facts and corroborating and overlapping data that supports the AGW consensus is far wider, deeper, validated, and significant than the postulations about the shape of the earth.
And since you are comparing one 'consensus' that was found false, to how many scientific consensus' that are still right; your argument even now still look like a person who exaggerates miniscule doubt as a means to attempt to say your argument has any significance. It doesn't.
As you should know, each and every one of those scientists who AGREE in the consensus, has thousands upon thousands of hours of real experience in the field that you have little knowledge of. And when they come to an agreement, it isn't just their numbers in consensus that have serious implication, but the validity and qualifications of each individual and how much more likely each and every one of them is more likely to be right than you, or I, or any news pundit.... Or the one or two climate scientists who were nobodies that became famous by challenging what in their field is obvious. It turned out recently that one of those three was paid by big oil to disagree.
You attacked the fact I mentioned consensus, and pretended that none of the science/facts that led to it existed when you challenged my point. Your argument is bullshit, as is your attempt to make insignificance look significant.
The data is pretty sound, and only those who don't know the difference continue to act like it is the data, not their ignorance, that doesn't make sense.
When all of the surgeons say to use aseptic technique, the nurse who doesn't understand the microbial infections are expected to follow anyway and spend some personal effor at learning why if they don't understand. I defer to the best minds, as you do. The difference being that you only do it when they agree with you and you hold to miniscule, yet exaggerated doubt, when they don't.
I understand science, and as a stem cell scientist, I have learned through my experience that the best scientists are the most likely to be right, and also that major consensus has serious validity. Also, as an infrmed and aware citizen, it is clear that capital interests have major power over information and perception. Some humility and realism would serve you well.
There aren't scientists on both sides if the argument... There are scientists on one side, and pro capital propaganda machines on the other, some masquerading as scientists but not applying scientific method.
Yes, you have a problem.
Your perspective and attitude is largely determinant of your experience. Since yours is like a spoiled brat, you understand the world from that position. Given some maturity, and a few other keys to better living, your experiences (otherwise unchanged) would have had completely different impact on your life.
You will never understand; and so I'm only using you as a whipping post for setting example.
Employers with apropriate standards don't even care. Instead they monitor your total output and if it isn't eough, you are counseled, and later fired if you don't improve. And in my experience, telecommuters don't make efficient use of their time. You can blame facebook, coffee and cig breaks, being gabby, being distraught, being lazy, whatever.... output is what matters and management worth keeping are managers who focus on that. The best employers I know of, with the most highly performing employees, have very relaxed scheduling and limitations.... they simply expect high performance and won't keep you if you do less.
Grow up. You've got the attitude of a bitchy spoiled brat.
That is poor rail network flaw, not szome absolute barrier. If you've ever used european mass transit, you know th system can be designed well. You get on a bus for the ride to yojr local station, which connects to larger stations... there are multiple paths, fast trains that only top at major cities, and slower trains that split off and stop at each, or every other town. The efficiency is awesome, and you can beat a car easily.
In my experience, telecommuters don't get much real work done.
Lol. Facts don't require faith. Youre just another christian wordsmith trying to sound smart but deliberately failing to use clear language for the purpose of ideological defense. Please use a dictionary.