This and OnLive are only about applying the cloud computing buzzword to gaming, so they can cash in the venture capital before anyone realizes they don't actually work.
Again, I'm not comparing them to the US. I'm comparing them to your example. You claim that Switzerland is an anomaly but conveniently ignore the fact there are other countries with a similar level of gun ownership and crime rate. Are they anomalies too?
They don't have that many guns, and they all have stringent gun control. Switzerland isn't an anomaly really, more of an example of working gun control.
So you admit that there are causes for crime besides the availability of guns?
No fucking shit, sherlock.
Correlation does not equal causation. Either prove that gun control is the reason that they have a lower murder rate or admit that you are making an argument that you can't support with hard facts and data. There are a host of other factors (poverty, lack of educational opportunities, lack of economic opportunity, the war on drugs, abusive parents/authority figures, etc, etc) that come into play where crime is concerned and you are pretending that none of them exist.
Spoiler: all of those things exist in Europe too.
"Sane" people want to kill? You have an interesting definition of "sane".
No, sane people don't want to kill if it's not worth it. Learn to read.
What does that have to do with anything? The US has laws that are restrictive enough. Criminals can't legally possess firearms here. Dealers in firearms can't legally sell them to criminals. The major differences that I've seen between US and European gun laws is the lack of a provision for concealed carry and more stringent storage requirements. Neither of those can explain the difference in crime rates.
Are you required to get a license and register them with the feds, like in all of the European countries you listed?
None of those countries (apart from Switzerland) have a "comparatively high rate". All of them have around a third of US gun ownership.
Who cares why they want to kill?
You care because you're under the impression that people capable of killing want to kill no matter what. This isn't the case. Sane people will want to kill if the risk makes it worth it for them, and the risk decreases substantially if you have a firearm, whether your target has one or not.
I've never disputed that there are countries with a lower murder rate than my own. What I dispute is that gun ownership has anything to do with the difference in that murder rate.
The point is that developed countries with gun control have less murder than the US, and if you can come up with an alternative explanation, then, again, I'd like to hear it. So far you've only compared the US to countries that have a high crime rate because they're economically and socially still in the shitter from the communist era. Whether guns would make them worse is not known.
Someone who has no moral compass is going to be inclined to kill no matter what.
This is naive. Most people don't kill because they want to kill, they kill because they want to take your possessions and get away with it. The risk of doing so is lower the more powerful your weapon is, and the likelihood of someone doing something criminal increases the lower the risk is.
nor are knives any less deadly than a firearm
Are you serious?
I love it! You admit that your own argument has no merit.
No, I admit there's probably a cultural element and guns alone don't kill people. That doesn't mean that the majority of countries with gun control and the same level of development as the US don't have far less murder.
BTW, it's not just Switzerland -- Finland, France, Germany, Canada and Sweden have nearly as much gun ownership and similarly low crime rates.
You are comparing the US to the Eastern Bloc as far as murder is concerned and you are arguing for the status quo! Doing better than Belarus despite (according to you) guns is no great achievement. And the tool is important. If you have a knife and they don't, they can still fight back. If you have a gun and they don't, they're fucked, which means you'd be much more inclined to kill them given your success is guaranteed. The thing is, people capable of murder aren't necessarily psychos who want to kill no matter how. If you're a mugger, would you be more likely to attack people if you had a gun or a knife?
And concerning developed nations, the biggest difference between the USA and the rest of them is gun ownership. Of course this isn't clear cut, like in Switzerland, but if you have a better theory as to why Americans kill each other more often than Western Europeans, I'm all ears.
So you're comparing the USA to the Eastern Bloc and saying everything is a-ok?
Firearms matter because it's much easier to shoot someone than to stab them, and people will be much more inclined to try. And while banning guns won't prevent every criminal from having them and legalizing them won't make everyone into a crazed gunman, you still haven't explained the difference in homicide rate between the USA and similarly developed countries.
The US's homicide rate is right next to Bulgaria and 64% of those crimes are committed with a firearm! How do you explain the rate of homicide by firearm if not due to the ease of their availability?
But gun legislation does make it damn harder for criminals to get guns too. Just look at most of Europe.
But then again, I think gun crime might be a more of a cultural problem. In Switzerland, everyone between 20 and 30 has an assault rifle by law and they have more knife crime than gun crime.
The difference is that you guys aren't at a Cold War with Russia any more, and back then space superiority = ICBM superiority. The relationship you have is just different now. See if you can get North Korea to fly to Mars.
I use XP x64 and I've never had any problems (apart from it not supporting 16-bit installers, but I can get around that with a VM).
Are you sure you're not talking about Windows XP 64-bit Edition (for Itanium) as opposed to Windows XP x64 (for AMD64)?
They have a lot of photos from a lot of places taken at known times. If they want, they can identify the people on the photos, but for some reason that's not reason to be paranoid.
No, the point is that if you're paranoid about the British government tracking everyone then why aren't you afraid of Google blackmailing everyone they see doing something furtively? Face recognition isn't that hard.
Slashdot Mirror
What about UMSDOS? ZipSlack uses it to add Linux FS features to FAT.
This and OnLive are only about applying the cloud computing buzzword to gaming, so they can cash in the venture capital before anyone realizes they don't actually work.
What's the point in creating something just as flawed and mysterious as the human mind? Why not do one better?
Encryption?
emerge sys-misc/confidence done
Or if you have fairly standard hardware, try XP x64 (not 64-bit edition). It's based on the Server 2003 kernel and stable as hell.
Nuclear is the one place I'd appreciate excessive regulation.
But not necessarily miserable.
Sounds like you want K-Meleon.
I'm sure both Opera users are ecstatic ;)
Again, I'm not comparing them to the US. I'm comparing them to your example. You claim that Switzerland is an anomaly but conveniently ignore the fact there are other countries with a similar level of gun ownership and crime rate. Are they anomalies too?
They don't have that many guns, and they all have stringent gun control. Switzerland isn't an anomaly really, more of an example of working gun control.
So you admit that there are causes for crime besides the availability of guns?
No fucking shit, sherlock.
Correlation does not equal causation. Either prove that gun control is the reason that they have a lower murder rate or admit that you are making an argument that you can't support with hard facts and data. There are a host of other factors (poverty, lack of educational opportunities, lack of economic opportunity, the war on drugs, abusive parents/authority figures, etc, etc) that come into play where crime is concerned and you are pretending that none of them exist.
Spoiler: all of those things exist in Europe too.
"Sane" people want to kill? You have an interesting definition of "sane".
No, sane people don't want to kill if it's not worth it. Learn to read.
What does that have to do with anything? The US has laws that are restrictive enough. Criminals can't legally possess firearms here. Dealers in firearms can't legally sell them to criminals. The major differences that I've seen between US and European gun laws is the lack of a provision for concealed carry and more stringent storage requirements. Neither of those can explain the difference in crime rates.
Are you required to get a license and register them with the feds, like in all of the European countries you listed?
Besides, all of those countries (including Switzerland) have pretty restrictive gun laws, so I don't think you'd consider them positive examples.
None of those countries (apart from Switzerland) have a "comparatively high rate". All of them have around a third of US gun ownership.
Who cares why they want to kill?
You care because you're under the impression that people capable of killing want to kill no matter what. This isn't the case. Sane people will want to kill if the risk makes it worth it for them, and the risk decreases substantially if you have a firearm, whether your target has one or not.
I've never disputed that there are countries with a lower murder rate than my own. What I dispute is that gun ownership has anything to do with the difference in that murder rate.
The point is that developed countries with gun control have less murder than the US, and if you can come up with an alternative explanation, then, again, I'd like to hear it. So far you've only compared the US to countries that have a high crime rate because they're economically and socially still in the shitter from the communist era. Whether guns would make them worse is not known.
Someone who has no moral compass is going to be inclined to kill no matter what.
This is naive. Most people don't kill because they want to kill, they kill because they want to take your possessions and get away with it. The risk of doing so is lower the more powerful your weapon is, and the likelihood of someone doing something criminal increases the lower the risk is.
nor are knives any less deadly than a firearm
Are you serious?
I love it! You admit that your own argument has no merit.
No, I admit there's probably a cultural element and guns alone don't kill people. That doesn't mean that the majority of countries with gun control and the same level of development as the US don't have far less murder.
BTW, it's not just Switzerland -- Finland, France, Germany, Canada and Sweden have nearly as much gun ownership and similarly low crime rates.
None of the countries you listed come anywhere near the US in gun ownership. The closest ones (apart from Switzerland, which as I said, is an anomaly) are Yemen, Iraq and Serbia. I don't think you want to be compared to them either, especially when it comes to homicide rate.
You are comparing the US to the Eastern Bloc as far as murder is concerned and you are arguing for the status quo! Doing better than Belarus despite (according to you) guns is no great achievement. And the tool is important. If you have a knife and they don't, they can still fight back. If you have a gun and they don't, they're fucked, which means you'd be much more inclined to kill them given your success is guaranteed. The thing is, people capable of murder aren't necessarily psychos who want to kill no matter how. If you're a mugger, would you be more likely to attack people if you had a gun or a knife?
And concerning developed nations, the biggest difference between the USA and the rest of them is gun ownership. Of course this isn't clear cut, like in Switzerland, but if you have a better theory as to why Americans kill each other more often than Western Europeans, I'm all ears.
So you're comparing the USA to the Eastern Bloc and saying everything is a-ok?
Firearms matter because it's much easier to shoot someone than to stab them, and people will be much more inclined to try. And while banning guns won't prevent every criminal from having them and legalizing them won't make everyone into a crazed gunman, you still haven't explained the difference in homicide rate between the USA and similarly developed countries.
The US's homicide rate is right next to Bulgaria and 64% of those crimes are committed with a firearm! How do you explain the rate of homicide by firearm if not due to the ease of their availability?
Reality says otherwise I'm afraid.
But gun legislation does make it damn harder for criminals to get guns too. Just look at most of Europe. But then again, I think gun crime might be a more of a cultural problem. In Switzerland, everyone between 20 and 30 has an assault rifle by law and they have more knife crime than gun crime.
The difference is that you guys aren't at a Cold War with Russia any more, and back then space superiority = ICBM superiority. The relationship you have is just different now. See if you can get North Korea to fly to Mars.
I use XP x64 and I've never had any problems (apart from it not supporting 16-bit installers, but I can get around that with a VM). Are you sure you're not talking about Windows XP 64-bit Edition (for Itanium) as opposed to Windows XP x64 (for AMD64)?
Yes but to make it really user-friendly it would have to read say PPPoE connection information from the installed OS, which may be compromised.
They have a lot of photos from a lot of places taken at known times. If they want, they can identify the people on the photos, but for some reason that's not reason to be paranoid.
That's fine, but my original question is why are people paranoid about CCTV but not Street View.
No, the point is that if you're paranoid about the British government tracking everyone then why aren't you afraid of Google blackmailing everyone they see doing something furtively? Face recognition isn't that hard.