Why do you only talk like an adult? As far as I know, there's no (or mixed) support for talking like an adult versus "motherese." What is known is that children prefer "motherese."
Even if someone opens up a shop, it doesn't mean you trust their credentials unless they act with deliberate subterfuge, and if they're willing to go that far they might ignore licensing laws anyway.
Your leech example is a very, very bad argument, because medical science in those times was non-existent and if you had regulatory bodies then they'd still be happily accepting common "knowledge" over mumbo-jumbo much in the same way the British Health system (used to until recently?) accept homeopathy. Your implicit belief is that regulatory bodies operate objectively and on sound science, which is neither true nor really possible (since "accepted science" is based on convention and the absolute truth is unknown to us). You have a very poor understanding of the history of medicine if you think that stuff like bloodletting and leeches was due to no regulation--it was based on theory at the time, rooted in the thought of Galen, Hippocraties, and other Greeks. Unscientific, yes, but these were hardly scientific times.
But a much stronger point is that simply a lot of the regulations are too strict and act to restrict people that DO have enough training and expertise.
As an additional musing, if you belief that the government should regulate things out of truth, then should the government regulate religious belief and only allow "scientifically true" beliefs, i.e., only those that can be demonstrated factually? Should advice be regulated in exactly the same manner that psychology is, since bad advice on human behavior is in essence malpractice in psychology?
ClintJCL is spot on. If you missed the not-too-long-ago news about the Obama administration ordering an assassination on an American citizen then you're too uninformed to be talking about wikileaks in any capacity.
Note, before you mark this as a troll, mods, note that this refers not to "human rights" per se but the EU Constitution's idea of what a "human right" is.
The best way to recover files deleted that long ago from a hard drive is probably one of these three options:
1) Invent a time machine and travel back in time to when the file was on the hard drive (or at least deleted and not yet had the sectors written-over); 2) Go underground in the world of dark magicks to discover a sinister ritual involving virgin sacrifice to resurrect the long-dead files; 3) Use an Ouija board with simply "1" and "0" on it and reconstruct the file from the afterlife bit-by-bit.
These are the likeliest and easiest solutions to your problem. I wish you luck.
It's amazing how most of politics is just trying to frame an issue with such language that it fits within your view of the world in a positive-sounding matter.
Let me put it this way.
What is the functional difference between this being a "tax" or a "fine?" Take out the words and their negative connotations, and strip this all down to simply action, to behavior. How would an external observer tell the difference between whether this was a fine or a tax?
Why don't we just call speeders on the highway as getting an additional "tax?" Taxes for parking in no-parking zones on the street? Taxes for getting caught smoking small amounts of marijuana?
The fact that you would try to re-frame this as a "tax" on not doing something is ludicrous. You do this, psychologically speaking, because you think that 1) taxation is a necessary part of government, and 2) nobody can oppose taxation sanely, so 3) people must support this as it being "taxation." You're using a language trick to try to promote the necessity of this.
The difference is that extra monitoring by some entity (i.e., the government) is not occurring here. If something is being leaked from, say, a bank, it's because it's noteworthily bad or unethical. If they did only good/not badthings there'd be nothing to leak. Whistleblowing is not a camera pointed at you every day.
Finally someone here that hasn't drank the democracy kool-aid. The fact is, democracy is only the grease on the wheels in certain areas, it certainly isn't something to be held to for its own sake. Only care about democracy if it makes you more free, but don't cling to it if it doesn't. My pragmatic approach.
...when, in a world of people starving, being butchered, being sent to jail for doing the right thing......that people think that loud commercials are oppression.
Their USA-based stuff is what gets the attention. Wikileaks releases more stuff that goes unnoticed, and Assange specifically addresssed this in an interview. They've got some Russian stuff upcoming.
Ever see the movie Salo? That's exactly what your quote reminded me of. The Marines are just like the libertine fascists, enjoying bum fuckery and shit-eating.//
I'm not a fan of Ron Paul, but you're being very dishonest. Every time RP introduces a bill as drastic as that (and he does!), the bill either gets gutted, voted down, or lost in committee. He's starting at a realistic point. If he goes to far it gets ignored.
I like how you cleverly switched from his talking about legal concealed carry to a subtle but very distinct difference, the "number of concealed weapons." Very clever.
Yeah, I know, but I mentioned Obama because nobody here has faith in the Republicans anyway, so there's no need to bring up that bit of obviousness. Of course I got modded down troll for telling the truth. The Obama fans still have HOPE...
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you only talk like an adult? As far as I know, there's no (or mixed) support for talking like an adult versus "motherese." What is known is that children prefer "motherese."
And they'll probably be right, actually. The government profiles people that are against it; big surprise!
You know, BitZtream, Slashdot is a huge place, and it's kind of sad that I recognize your name from previous stupid posts like the one above.
The collateral murder video was slanted, but it's not like they used heavy clever editing or anything.
BTW, citation on the homeopathy thing:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1712197/
Even if someone opens up a shop, it doesn't mean you trust their credentials unless they act with deliberate subterfuge, and if they're willing to go that far they might ignore licensing laws anyway.
Your leech example is a very, very bad argument, because medical science in those times was non-existent and if you had regulatory bodies then they'd still be happily accepting common "knowledge" over mumbo-jumbo much in the same way the British Health system (used to until recently?) accept homeopathy. Your implicit belief is that regulatory bodies operate objectively and on sound science, which is neither true nor really possible (since "accepted science" is based on convention and the absolute truth is unknown to us). You have a very poor understanding of the history of medicine if you think that stuff like bloodletting and leeches was due to no regulation--it was based on theory at the time, rooted in the thought of Galen, Hippocraties, and other Greeks. Unscientific, yes, but these were hardly scientific times.
But a much stronger point is that simply a lot of the regulations are too strict and act to restrict people that DO have enough training and expertise.
As an additional musing, if you belief that the government should regulate things out of truth, then should the government regulate religious belief and only allow "scientifically true" beliefs, i.e., only those that can be demonstrated factually? Should advice be regulated in exactly the same manner that psychology is, since bad advice on human behavior is in essence malpractice in psychology?
ClintJCL is spot on. If you missed the not-too-long-ago news about the Obama administration ordering an assassination on an American citizen then you're too uninformed to be talking about wikileaks in any capacity.
Wow, clone certainly does seem like a moron...
Nothing to see here or much to discuss, really, this is just another case of crony capitalism.
Note, before you mark this as a troll, mods, note that this refers not to "human rights" per se but the EU Constitution's idea of what a "human right" is.
[blockquote]a well-known megalomaniac with a history of believing that only his version of morality is correct[/blockquote]
Believes that only his version of morality is correct? You don't say!
I realized that before I hit "submit," but I thought my post was too amusing to let go. :)
The best way to recover files deleted that long ago from a hard drive is probably one of these three options:
1) Invent a time machine and travel back in time to when the file was on the hard drive (or at least deleted and not yet had the sectors written-over);
2) Go underground in the world of dark magicks to discover a sinister ritual involving virgin sacrifice to resurrect the long-dead files;
3) Use an Ouija board with simply "1" and "0" on it and reconstruct the file from the afterlife bit-by-bit.
These are the likeliest and easiest solutions to your problem. I wish you luck.
The description in the profile is perfectly him, and the last login date was 2006. Also, pictures of him never before seen.
http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison
http://www.okcupid.com/profile/HarryHarrison
Relax, it was a joke, why are people taking that statement so seriously?
But I thought information wants to be free?
It's amazing how most of politics is just trying to frame an issue with such language that it fits within your view of the world in a positive-sounding matter.
Let me put it this way.
What is the functional difference between this being a "tax" or a "fine?" Take out the words and their negative connotations, and strip this all down to simply action, to behavior. How would an external observer tell the difference between whether this was a fine or a tax?
Why don't we just call speeders on the highway as getting an additional "tax?" Taxes for parking in no-parking zones on the street? Taxes for getting caught smoking small amounts of marijuana?
The fact that you would try to re-frame this as a "tax" on not doing something is ludicrous. You do this, psychologically speaking, because you think that 1) taxation is a necessary part of government, and 2) nobody can oppose taxation sanely, so 3) people must support this as it being "taxation." You're using a language trick to try to promote the necessity of this.
Very clever and subtle equivocating there.
The difference is that extra monitoring by some entity (i.e., the government) is not occurring here. If something is being leaked from, say, a bank, it's because it's noteworthily bad or unethical. If they did only good/not badthings there'd be nothing to leak. Whistleblowing is not a camera pointed at you every day.
Finally someone here that hasn't drank the democracy kool-aid. The fact is, democracy is only the grease on the wheels in certain areas, it certainly isn't something to be held to for its own sake. Only care about democracy if it makes you more free, but don't cling to it if it doesn't. My pragmatic approach.
...when, in a world of people starving, being butchered, being sent to jail for doing the right thing... ...that people think that loud commercials are oppression.
Their USA-based stuff is what gets the attention. Wikileaks releases more stuff that goes unnoticed, and Assange specifically addresssed this in an interview. They've got some Russian stuff upcoming.
Ever see the movie Salo? That's exactly what your quote reminded me of. The Marines are just like the libertine fascists, enjoying bum fuckery and shit-eating.//
I'm not a fan of Ron Paul, but you're being very dishonest. Every time RP introduces a bill as drastic as that (and he does!), the bill either gets gutted, voted down, or lost in committee. He's starting at a realistic point. If he goes to far it gets ignored.
I like how you cleverly switched from his talking about legal concealed carry to a subtle but very distinct difference, the "number of concealed weapons." Very clever.
Yeah, I know, but I mentioned Obama because nobody here has faith in the Republicans anyway, so there's no need to bring up that bit of obviousness. Of course I got modded down troll for telling the truth. The Obama fans still have HOPE...