Except you DO support those laws as you are enforcing them.
And don't you dare say "But I'm just following orders" (doing my job, enforcing the unconstitutional law, whatever).
As I've said elsewhere, the Nuremburg Defense didn't work before, it won't work here. Say no. Refuse to enforce laws that are wrong. Take a stand. Yes, it may get you fired, but it's a small price to pay to keep your soul intact.
As for your rant on MJ, booze, etc... you are making it more and more obvious you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. What medical degree did you get to know how drugs affect people? What sociology degree did you get to understand the subtle points of prohibition? I'm guessing 'none'. Yet, because you enforce the worst aspect of such activity, you project those experiences to all of society.
When you support blatantly unconstitutional laws like the prohibition of prostitution or drugs, you are helping criminalize what most people see as acceptable behavior. Yes, some people won't follow the law, and will still deal/turn-tricks/etc in inappropriate areas, but when you enforce those issues, you are enforcing "zoning" or "visibility" issues, not fascist morality issues.
I also strongly disagree that people won't follow the zoning/etc restrictions if prostitution and drugs were legalized. There's a strong economic incentive to stay legal, and it simplifies the business. Compare to liquor stores - there isn't a moral outrage against police enforcing underage-selling laws for alcohol, as that's a useful law that doesn't restrict responsible adults. There is a moral issue with the police enforcing the other things, though, as it conflates the "bad" use with responsible use.
I suggest looking into LEAP, and how some cops are trying to clean up their image and relationship with the populace.
Yes, but the police are still willfully going out to enforce it. They even support it with large lobbying campaigns and such. They are just as culpable.
The Nuremberg Defense didn't work then, it doesn't work now.
Well, I was referring to only some traffic issues. There's a difference between people engaging in actually dangerous behavior, and the "revenue generation" speed traps that undermine the respect people have of the police/etc.
As for morality crimes... do you want hookers turning tricks in your front yard? I suspect not.
No, but that's a problem because of the illegality of prostitution. Legalize it, and you can zone it into sane business/industrial districts like all other "objectionable" business.
Do you want to live next to a dope house? If you're an addict, it's convenient...
Again, that's mostly a problem because it's illegal in the first place. Legalize it all, do away with the corruption of the WoD, and these problems can be dealt with properly. If you can buy such things legally, there's no need for a dealer to set up in a residential house like that. Liquor stores work.
Everyone loves seatbelt enforcement; they save lives, right?
No, I hate that idiocy on it's face. Now, I will always wear a seatbelt as it's idiotic not to, but it's not my place in a free country to tell others how to be safe at the force of a gun.
Policework is like fishing, you cast your line, and reel in the bites as they come, Big One or not.
And that is the problem right there. For a country to be free, you cannot just "fish" for crime. There has to be a proper moral underpinning. Why do you hate America and our wonderful freedoms?
The only victims I've ever had that hate me are domestic violence victims.
And as someone who has had to call the police on a DV problem, I didn't hate them. I actually liked the police that responded - they dealt with the situation quite professionally. I do see how that could be a problem in many cases, though, and unfortunately, there's no great solution to that one...
A) It's "worst" in the sense that any all-out war is bad. Many many many people on all sides die.
B) Where, exactly, am I advocating shooting cops? I specifically said that filming them as a good alternative solution to try for now.
C) Yes, there is a mini-war going on in the streets. You could say I'm suggesting that a diplomatic solution could be found, and at least tried, before just jumping on the Bush-style "just bomb them back to the stone age" method.
I guess my point is that, for this country to truly support freedom, this confrontation will have to happen eventually.
Traditionally, this is through a violent revolution or coup or similar. Civil War is about the worst possible solution, though, and if we can avoid it with some smaller conflicts now, that would be better for everybody.
Unfortunately, I don't think it will work - too many people are apologists for the police and the powers-that-be, too many people are profiting from the current situation, and the dominionists are actively trying to provoke the country. I really do fear this country will need to have it's Tree Of Liberty watered with the Blood of Patriots again, for this to really be fixed, just as Jefferson predicted.
It's worth this (and other) attempts at avoiding it, though.
The victims hate the cops as much as the criminals.
And that is the problem.
The solution isn't to just "give up" on areas like that, it's to fix the police behavior (and political mess that's related).
Do away with the things people hate the cops for, like the War On (some) Drugs, idiotically stupid traffic enforcement, enforcement of morality, etc, and people will like the cops again. Do away with the abuses of power they have by quickly and publicly punishing those cops that commit the abuses, and people will like the cops again.
Yes, fighting violent crime is hard, but those that actually do go out and fight that good fight are generally well supported.
You could say the police are a victim of the political idiocy in this country, and forced to take part is such mess that hurts their reputation a lot, but the "I was just following orders!" defense was invalid in Nuremberg, and it's just as invalid here.
As someone who has given money to the ACLU from time to time, this is a GREAT use of my money. If it can catch some of the cops abusing the power of the gun that they wield, it's a huge win.
Also, similar to how concealed-carry weapons lower crime even for those who are not carrying, the knowledge that there's a lot of people out there ready to catch the police abusing their power can act like a great deterring factor, which is an even better win. Stopping the abuse before it starts is a much better solution.
While I agree that on a practical side, you are probably correct, I love that the issue is being forced. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better, and that bridge will have to be crossed eventually. (well, short of a miracle)
By forcing the issue now, hopefully the issue can be brought to light and fixed, and the increase in police issues could hopefully be a temporary condition. By not doing it, things just stew longer and get worse. Hopefully, the sooner it is addressed, the shorter and milder the "dangerous increase in police issues" period could be.
I believe I've heard somewhere the theory of "Ok, yes, we have to take the cash, but I also don't have to make change for you." This may make it highly annoying to use cash in some situations.
not all, of course, but the "reviewing doctor" they hire to look over the forms for a reason to reject has one. That's the entire point - it's a "doctor" reviewing it.
Now, I'm sure it could be any degree, in any medical field, so it's not like they have to know what they are reviewing, but theoretically they are doctors. I wouldn't put it past them to just blatantly ignore their own rules, though, and rubber-stamp a bunch of forms when their normal reviewers are too busy.
when I was there it was during the rapid-inflation that happened in the "new capitalism" of the 90s. I believe when I arrived it was 105 Ruble/Dollar, and when I left about 4 weeks later it was 145.
In fact, it was quite the striking thing to see such rapid inflation in person. Anybody would do anything for hard currency (USD, mainly), as it was so obvious the ruble was falling through the floor.
I played some of those when I was staying in Moscow in... when was it... '92?
They had "sniper-2" (with the moving circular targets) and the yellow one with the atari 2600 style Pole Position clone at the hotel...
Though, they charged us 2 ruble for a game, not the 15 kopeck one of the pictures shows. I guess that's what happens when capitalism runs in or something.
They were pretty fun for a computer-geek traveling in Russia at the time...
Re:~$ mv CommitAccess MergePrivileges
on
Linus on GIT and SCM
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
It is moving the problems to a neighboring problem-space, but that allows for a good benefit: getting everybody to check trivial changes in.
(at least, that's what I got from his talk)
I know I've seen it before - the problem where commits are restricted by management (for good reason), and people cannot commit their current work. I've seen this destroy some work before, as it means everybody is basically always running with a 1-2 week window of changes that are not checked in to the "safe, backed up". Ouch.
If you defer the problem a bit, so everybody can commit changes all the time, that helps keep everybody on "good practices". Also, he mentioned a workgroup situation: if I commit changes to a local repository, I can give the other people in the repository easy, save access to it without having to mess with the main branch.
One important change, though, is the direction of the conflict. CVS/etc uses a "push" model, where developers have to push their changes to the server. GIT (in theory) works as a "pull" model, where a manger could pull the changes the developers have made. I kindof like that idea, as it means conflicts are in the arena of the manager, in theory freeing the developers from some of the mess.
That's a fairly directed statement, that they should know to be untrue, and therefor it should be a rather simple libel case for the people it was directed at...
I mean, if idiots can bring libel cases against forum posts for just making them look bad, I would think wrongfully accusing someone of being a pedophile would be an open-and-shut case.
and if that is all the "concert" is, the it's be... rather stupid.
Most of the time you have a tuba, though, it's with a much larger band. The ensemble makes it worthwhile.
The problem here is laptops tend to bring out the "I'll just hit play in the sequencer" attitude in people. I've seen too many "shows" where they just stood there and pretended to poke at the laptop, and/or just messed with levels or something. This is a DJ act. Which is fine, but don't pretend it's a "Live Show" at the same level as having a real band up there.
People need to remember that the most important thing about being on stage is showmanship!
I'm not sure about that concert, but from what I've seen of BT, he puts a bunch more into his concerts than just the laptop. He usually has other equipment (and does in those pics, from what I can tell), a light show, etc.
That makes it somewhat borderline... but I'm more talking about how you shouldn't be this idiocy (note the lack of a power cable on the keyboard ). That idiot couldn't even tap his foot in time with his own music, and just hit play on the laptop and faked it the whole time.
As much as I love electronic, industrial, experimental music...
"You and your laptop are not a live act!"
Sure, they are useful tools, but standing behind a laptop looks really stupid on stage. Dance. Sing. Play some other instrument as well. Anything. Just don't stand behind you laptop looking like an idiot. If that's all your music is, press it to CD and give it to a DJ to play. That can be good too... but Live Music requires doing something Live that is visible to the audience!
Second, could this be why so many of the same politicians/etc go for things like outsourcing as much as possible? If it's not in the MMM&Pizza group of goals, it's a "waste of time and/or energy", so it shouldn't be pursued?
The irony I see here is that in the process we outsource and destroy the only real (non-ip-related) industry we have left in an effort to pursue a mathematically impossible goal (in the long term).
Slashdot Mirror
As an old security tutorial/guide I read a long time ago said: "Never underestimate the number of MIP-years they are willing to throw at the problem."
Ooo... mindwarp was correct, then!
Except you DO support those laws as you are enforcing them.
And don't you dare say "But I'm just following orders" (doing my job, enforcing the unconstitutional law, whatever).
As I've said elsewhere, the Nuremburg Defense didn't work before, it won't work here. Say no. Refuse to enforce laws that are wrong. Take a stand. Yes, it may get you fired, but it's a small price to pay to keep your soul intact.
As for your rant on MJ, booze, etc... you are making it more and more obvious you have no fucking idea what you are talking about. What medical degree did you get to know how drugs affect people? What sociology degree did you get to understand the subtle points of prohibition? I'm guessing 'none'. Yet, because you enforce the worst aspect of such activity, you project those experiences to all of society.
I'm done with you, fascist.
sigh... you are still missing the point.
When you support blatantly unconstitutional laws like the prohibition of prostitution or drugs, you are helping criminalize what most people see as acceptable behavior. Yes, some people won't follow the law, and will still deal/turn-tricks/etc in inappropriate areas, but when you enforce those issues, you are enforcing "zoning" or "visibility" issues, not fascist morality issues.
I also strongly disagree that people won't follow the zoning/etc restrictions if prostitution and drugs were legalized. There's a strong economic incentive to stay legal, and it simplifies the business. Compare to liquor stores - there isn't a moral outrage against police enforcing underage-selling laws for alcohol, as that's a useful law that doesn't restrict responsible adults. There is a moral issue with the police enforcing the other things, though, as it conflates the "bad" use with responsible use.
I suggest looking into LEAP, and how some cops are trying to clean up their image and relationship with the populace.
Yes, but the police are still willfully going out to enforce it. They even support it with large lobbying campaigns and such. They are just as culpable.
The Nuremberg Defense didn't work then, it doesn't work now.
I wholeheartedly support traffic crackdowns.
Well, I was referring to only some traffic issues. There's a difference between people engaging in actually dangerous behavior, and the "revenue generation" speed traps that undermine the respect people have of the police/etc.
As for morality crimes... do you want hookers turning tricks in your front yard? I suspect not.
No, but that's a problem because of the illegality of prostitution. Legalize it, and you can zone it into sane business/industrial districts like all other "objectionable" business.
Do you want to live next to a dope house? If you're an addict, it's convenient...
Again, that's mostly a problem because it's illegal in the first place. Legalize it all, do away with the corruption of the WoD, and these problems can be dealt with properly. If you can buy such things legally, there's no need for a dealer to set up in a residential house like that. Liquor stores work.
Everyone loves seatbelt enforcement; they save lives, right?
No, I hate that idiocy on it's face. Now, I will always wear a seatbelt as it's idiotic not to, but it's not my place in a free country to tell others how to be safe at the force of a gun.
Policework is like fishing, you cast your line, and reel in the bites as they come, Big One or not.
And that is the problem right there. For a country to be free, you cannot just "fish" for crime. There has to be a proper moral underpinning. Why do you hate America and our wonderful freedoms?
The only victims I've ever had that hate me are domestic violence victims.
And as someone who has had to call the police on a DV problem, I didn't hate them. I actually liked the police that responded - they dealt with the situation quite professionally. I do see how that could be a problem in many cases, though, and unfortunately, there's no great solution to that one...
...and and even better point is that the police are the criminals in some cases. Which are exactly the cases this is intended to address.
A) It's "worst" in the sense that any all-out war is bad. Many many many people on all sides die.
B) Where, exactly, am I advocating shooting cops? I specifically said that filming them as a good alternative solution to try for now.
C) Yes, there is a mini-war going on in the streets. You could say I'm suggesting that a diplomatic solution could be found, and at least tried, before just jumping on the Bush-style "just bomb them back to the stone age" method.
I guess my point is that, for this country to truly support freedom, this confrontation will have to happen eventually.
Traditionally, this is through a violent revolution or coup or similar. Civil War is about the worst possible solution, though, and if we can avoid it with some smaller conflicts now, that would be better for everybody.
Unfortunately, I don't think it will work - too many people are apologists for the police and the powers-that-be, too many people are profiting from the current situation, and the dominionists are actively trying to provoke the country. I really do fear this country will need to have it's Tree Of Liberty watered with the Blood of Patriots again, for this to really be fixed, just as Jefferson predicted.
It's worth this (and other) attempts at avoiding it, though.
The victims hate the cops as much as the criminals.
And that is the problem.
The solution isn't to just "give up" on areas like that, it's to fix the police behavior (and political mess that's related).
Do away with the things people hate the cops for, like the War On (some) Drugs, idiotically stupid traffic enforcement, enforcement of morality, etc, and people will like the cops again. Do away with the abuses of power they have by quickly and publicly punishing those cops that commit the abuses, and people will like the cops again.
Yes, fighting violent crime is hard, but those that actually do go out and fight that good fight are generally well supported.
You could say the police are a victim of the political idiocy in this country, and forced to take part is such mess that hurts their reputation a lot, but the "I was just following orders!" defense was invalid in Nuremberg, and it's just as invalid here.
As someone who has given money to the ACLU from time to time, this is a GREAT use of my money. If it can catch some of the cops abusing the power of the gun that they wield, it's a huge win.
Also, similar to how concealed-carry weapons lower crime even for those who are not carrying, the knowledge that there's a lot of people out there ready to catch the police abusing their power can act like a great deterring factor, which is an even better win. Stopping the abuse before it starts is a much better solution.
While I agree that on a practical side, you are probably correct, I love that the issue is being forced. Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better, and that bridge will have to be crossed eventually. (well, short of a miracle)
By forcing the issue now, hopefully the issue can be brought to light and fixed, and the increase in police issues could hopefully be a temporary condition. By not doing it, things just stew longer and get worse. Hopefully, the sooner it is addressed, the shorter and milder the "dangerous increase in police issues" period could be.
to add to those thoughts:
I believe I've heard somewhere the theory of "Ok, yes, we have to take the cash, but I also don't have to make change for you." This may make it highly annoying to use cash in some situations.
one problem with this technique is most places charge some fee to make the money order/etc.
It may not be a lot, but the $7 they hit me with once was a lot in the "no cash college days".
not all, of course, but the "reviewing doctor" they hire to look over the forms for a reason to reject has one. That's the entire point - it's a "doctor" reviewing it.
Now, I'm sure it could be any degree, in any medical field, so it's not like they have to know what they are reviewing, but theoretically they are doctors. I wouldn't put it past them to just blatantly ignore their own rules, though, and rubber-stamp a bunch of forms when their normal reviewers are too busy.
It was especially sickening to see how the health insurance companies regard any payout as a 'loss'
That's especially interesting in light of the supposed "Do No Harm" oath they theoretically to to get that M.D.
Of course, that type of self-delusion-for-profit would be typical of the US these days... sigh...
I guess that was my point...
when I was there it was during the rapid-inflation that happened in the "new capitalism" of the 90s. I believe when I arrived it was 105 Ruble/Dollar, and when I left about 4 weeks later it was 145.
In fact, it was quite the striking thing to see such rapid inflation in person. Anybody would do anything for hard currency (USD, mainly), as it was so obvious the ruble was falling through the floor.
A lot happened in the that 10+ year period...
I played some of those when I was staying in Moscow in... when was it... '92?
They had "sniper-2" (with the moving circular targets) and the yellow one with the atari 2600 style Pole Position clone at the hotel...
Though, they charged us 2 ruble for a game, not the 15 kopeck one of the pictures shows. I guess that's what happens when capitalism runs in or something.
They were pretty fun for a computer-geek traveling in Russia at the time...
It is moving the problems to a neighboring problem-space, but that allows for a good benefit: getting everybody to check trivial changes in.
(at least, that's what I got from his talk)
I know I've seen it before - the problem where commits are restricted by management (for good reason), and people cannot commit their current work. I've seen this destroy some work before, as it means everybody is basically always running with a 1-2 week window of changes that are not checked in to the "safe, backed up". Ouch.
If you defer the problem a bit, so everybody can commit changes all the time, that helps keep everybody on "good practices". Also, he mentioned a workgroup situation: if I commit changes to a local repository, I can give the other people in the repository easy, save access to it without having to mess with the main branch.
One important change, though, is the direction of the conflict. CVS/etc uses a "push" model, where developers have to push their changes to the server. GIT (in theory) works as a "pull" model, where a manger could pull the changes the developers have made. I kindof like that idea, as it means conflicts are in the arena of the manager, in theory freeing the developers from some of the mess.
at least, that's as I understand it...
seriously, screw Buckethead!
I've beaten everything on both GH games on 5*, no problem, but "Jordan" is insane. You get to the "solo", and it's like solid notes for half the song.
I think I get to that same 57% spot. It's insane.
Even all the other songs that gave me trouble for a while like Six and Institutionalized are nothing now, yet Jordan is still insane.
I think he wrote that solo just to piss of the GH players.
"Every single one of you are indeed pedophiles."
That's a fairly directed statement, that they should know to be untrue, and therefor it should be a rather simple libel case for the people it was directed at...
I mean, if idiots can bring libel cases against forum posts for just making them look bad, I would think wrongfully accusing someone of being a pedophile would be an open-and-shut case.
of course, that's applying logic to law...
yep!
and if that is all the "concert" is, the it's be... rather stupid.
Most of the time you have a tuba, though, it's with a much larger band. The ensemble makes it worthwhile.
The problem here is laptops tend to bring out the "I'll just hit play in the sequencer" attitude in people. I've seen too many "shows" where they just stood there and pretended to poke at the laptop, and/or just messed with levels or something. This is a DJ act. Which is fine, but don't pretend it's a "Live Show" at the same level as having a real band up there.
People need to remember that the most important thing about being on stage is showmanship!
I'm not sure about that concert, but from what I've seen of BT, he puts a bunch more into his concerts than just the laptop. He usually has other equipment (and does in those pics, from what I can tell), a light show, etc.
That makes it somewhat borderline... but I'm more talking about how you shouldn't be this idiocy (note the lack of a power cable on the keyboard ). That idiot couldn't even tap his foot in time with his own music, and just hit play on the laptop and faked it the whole time.
As much as I love electronic, industrial, experimental music...
"You and your laptop are not a live act!"
Sure, they are useful tools, but standing behind a laptop looks really stupid on stage. Dance. Sing. Play some other instrument as well. Anything. Just don't stand behind you laptop looking like an idiot. If that's all your music is, press it to CD and give it to a DJ to play. That can be good too... but Live Music requires doing something Live that is visible to the audience!
End Industrial Karaoke now!
First, I very much like your summary here.
Second, could this be why so many of the same politicians/etc go for things like outsourcing as much as possible? If it's not in the MMM&Pizza group of goals, it's a "waste of time and/or energy", so it shouldn't be pursued?
The irony I see here is that in the process we outsource and destroy the only real (non-ip-related) industry we have left in an effort to pursue a mathematically impossible goal (in the long term).